African News Agency
Public Protector Thuli Madonsela said on Monday President Jacob Zuma should have halted the escalation of the cost of state-funded upgrades to his private Nkandla home.
“My answer regarding whether the president should have done something to stop, or to inquire into further expenditure after the media indicated possible alleged irregularities in 2009 is that, yes, the president should have done something,” Madonsela said in Pretoria, where she held an extraordinary media briefing following Sunday press reports of a tense exchange of letters with Zuma.
“At that time the cost estimate was R65 million. At that time the president, by his own admission, was interacting with officials through his principal agent Mr (Minenhle) Makhanya instead of official channels with ministers.”
Madonsela referred to a Constitutional Court finding which emphasised that there is an obligation for public officials to take action to prevent an irregularity once it has been brought to their attention.
She said there have been accusations that the Secure in Comfort report, in which she found that the president had unduly benefitted from the project, and its remedial recommendations targeted Zuma only.
“Firstly, the main complaint in terms of the Executive Members Ethics Act was directed at the conduct of the president.
“However, the report and all our (other) reports examine the propriety of the conduct of all functionaries who played or were supposed to play a part to prevent alleged irregularities,” said Madonsela.
She said a lot of accusations “have been flying around” regarding her office’s classification of infrastructure as non-security related structure.
“A simple reading of the Secure in Comfort report will show that it was the (government) task team that installed the items and named them.
“Such names appear in the architectural designs, memoranda, the minutes and a document called the apportionment document prepared by the task team at the request of (former deputy public works minister Hendrietta) Bogopane-Zulu to identify items for the payment by the owner, President JG Zuma, and those to be paid for by the state,” said Madonsela.
“In the minutes and the apportionment document, the swimming pool is referred to as a swimming pool. The narrative starts with a discussion that there is a request from the presidency to convert the firepool into a swimming pool.
“As the minutes progress, the item is flagged pending Mr Makhanya, the president’s agent, consulting the president on his willingness to pay for the conversion.
“This matter was pending in the minutes for a period of time then suddenly, without any documents indicating what the owner’s response was, we found that the firepool had been converted into a swimming pool.”
She said the apportionment document indicated an amount which was to be paid by the owner for the conversion of “the firepool topped up with swimming pool features”.
“It is clearly a swimming pool with firefighting functionality. Does it matter whether it is clean or not? Certainly not.
“The investigation was about what was constructed and not how the installations have been maintained or not.
“The label amphitheatre was given by the task team and the architect in the designs and the apportionment document.
“It is they that indicate that the amphitheatre was for dual purposes – sitting space for public gatherings and for soil retention due to the extensive disturbance done to the soil by the other installations.
“Regarding the kraal, the president has never denied that he asked for larger kraal when approached about moving his kraal which still exists. He has further never denied that this is one thing he was prepared to pay for.
“Regarding the security status of the kraal, my determination that it was not a security feature was because it was never in the list of 16 minimum physical security standard items that guided the upgrade of security at homes of presidents, former presidents, deputy presidents and former deputy presidents.”
She said the kraal was not on the list prepared by the authorised security experts who did the threat assessments at Nkandla.
In March last year, the public protector found that Zuma had unduly benefited from security upgrades with a price tag of R246m to his private home in Nkandla, and recommended he pay back a portion of the public funds used for the project. – African News Agency