Daily Archives: March 20, 2014

EFF to honour Ngaka Modiri


By Obakeng Maje
Montshioa-On the eve of the North West Provincial Manifesto launch, we have come almost full circle in terms of preparation to host fighters and communities from across the North West, says EFF Ouma Nkitseng.

“On the 24 March 2014 the
Commander in Chief will honour Ngaka Modiri Molema with a four day
visit, addressing mass meetings across the district before the
Manifesto Launch on the 29 March 2014” Nkitseng said.

“South Africa is at a political watershed and EFF is aggressively
agitating for economical freedom of our people as the 7th of May 2014
closes in we are ready to contest as a province and at national level
in the 2014 general election”.

EFF said it is against this background that the Provincial Command Team will address media at a press conference to be held as follow:

DATE: Today, 20 March 2014
VENUE: EFF Provincial Office Boardroom
TIME: 14H00
-TDN
Follow us on Twitter@Taung_DailyNews or @IceT_

Nothing political about report: Madonsela


Pretoria – The probe into upgrades to President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla home had no political motives, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela said on Wednesday.
“There is nothing political about the investigation. All I have done as an ombudsman is to discharge my responsibility,” she said in Pretoria after releasing her report on the probe.

“It is about public accountability. Government created that need for public accountability. I have done nothing more than discharging my responsibility.”

Madonsela said she did not fear for her life.

“What I like about being South African is that people disagree with you robustly but we haven’t become one of those democracies where people disappear,” she said.

“Surely if anybody wanted to harm me, they would have harmed me before I concluded the investigation. I don’t think our people are that mean-spirited.”

Madonsela’s report revealed that Zuma gave the nod for all upgrades at his Nkandla home. It also said Zuma and his family unduly benefited from the upgrades.

“It is common cause that in the name of security, government built for the president and his family in his private [home], a visitors centre, cattle kraal and chicken run, swimming pool, and amphitheatre among others,” she said.

“The president and his family clearly benefited from this.”

In November, Zuma told Parliament his residence in Nkandla was paid for by the Zuma family.

“I took the decision to expand my home and I built my home with more rondavels, more than once. And I fenced my home. And I engaged the bank and I’m still paying a bond on my first phase of my home,” he said at the time.

“My residence in Nkandla has been paid for by the Zuma family. All the buildings and every room we use in that residence, was built by ourselves as family and not by government.”

Zuma told Parliament he took exception to accusations that government money was spent for his benefit.

“I have never asked government to build a home for me, and it has not done so. Government did not build a home for me,” he said.

“It is unfair, and I don’t want to use harsher words because you believe that people like me can’t build a home.”

Violation of the ethics code

Madonsela said Zuma had not misled Parliament when he said his family had built its own houses and the State had not built any for them or benefited them.

“I have accepted the evidence that he addressed Parliament in good faith and was not thinking about the visitors centre, but his family dwelling, when he made the statement,” she said.

“It appears to have been a bona fide mistake and I am accordingly unable to find that his conduct was in violation of … the executive ethics code.”

The public protector has been criticised by the ANC for her handling of the probe, with the party’s secretary general Gwede Mantashe accusing her of trying to “muddy the waters in the election campaign”.

Madonsela was unfazed by the criticism.

“They have harmed my reputation by saying all sorts of things but South African people are discerning. People have been listening to what is being said and applying their mind,” she said.

“What we have learnt during this investigation is that people want public accountability. Despite the maladministration and shenanigans, a lot has happened that show that there is respect for the rule of law in this country.”

Madonsela said the excessive amount spent by government in the Nkandla upgrades was unconscionable.

“The expenditure incurred by the state, including buildings and other items installed by the DPW [department of public works], many of which went beyond what was reasonably required for the president’s security was unconscionable, excessive and caused a misappropriation of public funds,” she said.

“The failure to spend state funds prudently is a contravention of Section 195 of the Constitution and sections of the Public Finance Management Act.”

Service delivery programme sacrificed

She found that critical service delivery programmes were sacrificed and money was diverted towards upgrades to Zuma’s homestead.

“Funds were reallocated from the inner city regeneration project and the dolomite risk management programme of the department of public works,” Mandonsela said in her voluminous report.

“Due to lack of proper demand management and planning, service delivery programmes of the department of public works were negatively affected.”

Madonsela said the conduct of the department of public works was in violation of Section 237 of the Constitution and the Batho Pele White Paper.

She recommended that Zuma pay back a percentage of the upgrades.

“The president is to take steps with the assistance of the National Treasury and the SA Police Service to determine the reasonable cost of the measures implemented by the DPW at his private residence that do not relate to security,” she said in her report.

“[Zuma is to] pay a reasonable percentage of the cost of the measures”.

Madonsela said the amount to be paid back should be based on the cost of the installation of some or all of the items that were not accepted as security measures.

She also said Zuma must report to the National Assembly “on his comments and actions on this report” within 14 days.

SAPA

Oscar trial- What we know so far


Pretoria – Prosecutors expect to wrap up their murder case against Oscar Pistorius early next week after calling “four or five” more witnesses, they said on Wednesday.
Attempting to prove the world-famous double-amputee athlete intentionally killed girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp and is also guilty of three other firearms-related charges, the prosecution has called 18 witnesses so far; police investigators, neighbours, a security guard, some of Pistorius’s friends, a former girlfriend and a firearms trainer who was selling Pistorius more guns.

A look at the prosecution’s case in the first two-and-a-half weeks of the trial:

The fight

Crucial for prosecutors is their allegation that Pistorius fought with his girlfriend and had a motive before he shot her three times through a toilet door in a bathroom in his home.

Three neighbours testified to hearing a woman screaming in the pre-dawn hours of 14 February last year. A fourth said she heard a woman arguing.

Through police photographs of the blood-spattered scene, prosecutors have presented other evidence to suggest an argument: damage to Pistorius’s bedroom door, broken tiles in the bathroom and a bashed in metal panel, also in the bathroom.

There were blood spots in the bedroom away from where Pistorius likely would have carried Steenkamp when he says he took her to get help.

Pistorius says he was the only person to scream desperately for help after realising he had shot Steenkamp by mistake.

Chief defence lawyer Barry Roux cited noise tests that he says will show that neighbours are mistaken that they heard Steenkamp, and says he’ll also show Pistorius screams in a high-pitched voice when extremely anxious.

The defence hasn’t yet explained the damage to the bedroom door, bathroom tiles and metal panel.

The shooting

Police ballistics expert Captain Christiaan Mangena testified on Wednesday that Steenkamp was standing inside the toilet cubicle and facing the closed door when she was hit by the first bullet. Mangena said Steenkamp was shot in the right hip first, the second bullet missed, and the last two bullets hit the 29-year-old model in the arm and head.

He couldn’t determine the order of the last two shots.

But by saying the hip shot and miss were first, Mangena’s analysis appeared to support the prosecution’s claim that the earliest shots were not immediately deadly and Steenkamp would have screamed out, meaning Pistorius should have known who he was shooting at.

Defence experts will show Pistorius shot four times with two “double-tap” bursts, lawyer Roux said, and Steenkamp wouldn’t have had time to scream.

Roux also disputed Mangena’s shot sequence.

Initial cover-up

Housing estate security guard Pieter Baba said he had two phone calls with Pistorius after neighbours reported gunshots from the runner’s house.

Baba testified Pistorius told him everything was “fine” in the first call then phoned back moments later, cried and hung up.

The defence cast doubt on Baba’s recollection of events by producing phone records that they said showed Pistorius called the guard first, but couldn’t speak because he was so distraught.

He then called Baba back, defence lawyers said.

Still, Baba was certain of the words Pistorius spoke to him after the shooting: “Mr Pistorius said to me, security, everything is fine,” Baba testified.

Pistorius’s character

Prosecutors have scrutinised previous gun incidents involving Pistorius in relation to two other charges he faces for allegedly shooting in public, but the details have also been used to try to show Pistorius was reckless and sometimes angry and could have shot Steenkamp intentionally.

Two witnesses, one a former girlfriend, say Pistorius fired a shot out the open sunroof of a moving car in 2012 after an altercation with traffic police.

In another incident, friends say a gun Pistorius was handling in a restaurant fired and the Olympian asked someone else to take the blame, with prosecutors trying to show that Pistorius is also dishonest.

Pistorius completely denies the sunroof shooting and says the restaurant shooting was not his fault because his friend hadn’t warned him the gun he was passing was “one-up,” or had a bullet in the chamber.

Bungled investigation

Pistorius’s defence says the police investigation was flawed.

While prosecutors used a sequence of dozens of photos to show to the court the bloody and sometimes grisly shooting scene, Roux has pointed out police errors throughout.

In one, Roux got a senior policeman to tell how another officer picked up Pistorius’s gun and started handling it and maybe even cocking it at the scene without forensic gloves.

Roux also says defence experts will show marks on the toilet door which police investigators missed and which show Pistorius’s version to be true that he tried to kick the door down with his prosthetics to help Steenkamp after realising his mistake.

AP

ANC could take a hit after Nkandla report- expert


Pretoria – President Jacob Zuma benefitted “unduly” from a R246m state-funded security upgrade to his Nkandla homestead, the country’s graft watchdog said on Wednesday in a damning report six weeks before the elections.

Public Protector Thuli Madonsela accused Zuma of conduct “inconsistent with his office” and said he should pay for some of the unnecessary renovations.

The findings are another blow to Zuma and may harm the ruling African National Congress (ANC) in the 7 May polls.

The Presidency said Zuma had been “consistently concerned about the allegations of impropriety” that have swirled around the upgrade.

He would study the report and give his response “in due course”, the statement added.

Madonsela’s 444-page summary of her two-year probe into the renovations at Nkandla painted a picture of systemic official incompetence and flouted tender procedures that Zuma never questioned.

“The President tacitly accepted the implementation of all measures at his residence and has unduly benefited from the enormous capital investment in the non-security installations at his private residence,” Madonsela said.

She described the cost overruns as “exponential” and said ministers had handled the project in an “appalling manner”.

When the Nkandla scandal first broke in late 2009, the cost was estimated at R65m.  Despite intense public scrutiny since then, the bill ballooned to R246m as the project spiralled out of control.

The total amounts to eight times the money spent securing the home of former president  Nelson Mandela and more than 1 000 times that spent on FW de Klerk.

Even though Madonsela’s findings are in line with leaked excerpts to newspapers late last year, the ANC looks set to take a hit from voters angry at perceived corruption under Zuma and the country’s shoddy public services.

The ANC, which has staunchly supported Zuma during previous corruption and personal imbroglios, cancelled a scheduled news conference, saying it needed more time to study Madonsela’s findings. It will give its response at 10:00 on Thursday.

“This is negative for the ANC,” said Nic Borain, an independent political analyst.

“They will lose votes as a result of this.”

Underscoring the challenges facing the party, thousands of Numsa members sang anti-ANC songs as they marched through the streets of Johannesburg on Wednesday demanding greater workers’ rights.

– Reuters

Nkandla report release mostly welcomed


Johannesburg – Political parties and bodies mostly welcomed the release of Public Protector Thuli Madonsela’s report on upgrades to President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla homestead on Wednesday.

Government said it would reflect on the findings and recommendations contained in Madonsela’s report with a view to determining the way forward.

Justice Minister Jeff Radebe said the Special Investigating Unit was investigating the matter “to bring those in the public and private sectors who are implicated to book”.

“The ministers of public works, police, defence have taken full accountability for this project and through government investigation, has unearthed issues of maladministration and corruption in this project,” he said.

The Democratic Alliance, in welcoming the findings, said it would initiate impeachment proceedings against Zuma.

“Given these damning findings, I will submit a formal request to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Max Sisulu, to recall the National Assembly as a matter of urgency to initiate impeachment proceedings against President Zuma,” DA Parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko said in a statement.

“Impeachment is the correct course of action for this flagrant abuse of public money.”

Maladministration

The presidency, following the report’s release, said it would be used as an added tool to address claims of maladministration.

Spokesperson Mac Maharaj said in a statement that Zuma directed the Special Investigating Unit in December to probe alleged maladministration in the security upgrades at Nkandla.

He had also appointed an inter-ministerial task team to look into the matter.

“In this context, the Public Protector’s report will be an additional tool which will fall under the consideration of President Zuma in addressing allegations of maladministration.”

The Freedom Front Plus lent support to possible impeachment proceedings against Zuma.

FF Plus MP Pieter Groenewald said Zuma should repay taxpayers’ money used for the upgrades.

“It should also be considered to impeach Zuma where he, together with the Minister of Police, Nathi Mthethwa, should account to Parliament how it is possible that an initial R27m for security could eventually amount to R247m,” Groenewald said.

United Democratic Movement leader Bantu Holomisa said the report marked one of the darkest moments in the country’s history since democracy.

“The findings that President Zuma has once again violated the Executive Members Ethics Code through his failure to act in protection of state resources… and has unduly benefited from the enormous capital investment, must be offensive to any nation that takes pride in the values espoused in its constitution.”

Press conference delayed

Parliament, in noting the release of the report, said Zuma would need to submit a copy to the National Assembly (NA).

“According to the Public Protector, the investigation was conducted on the basis of the Executive Member’s Ethics Act 82 of 1998,” Parliament said in a statement.

In terms of this Act, and per the public protector’s pronouncement, Zuma had to, within a reasonable time but not later than 14 days submit a copy of the report to the NA.

Such a report must, in terms of the Act, contain the president’s comments together with any action taken or to be taken in regard to the report.

“At this point, the National Assembly has not received a copy of the report,” Parliament said.

An African National Congress press conference scheduled for Wednesday following the report’s release was delayed to Thursday.

“We must first give our government a chance to respond. So our press conference is postponed to tomorrow [Thursday]” spokesperson Jackson Mthembu told reporters in Johannesburg.

“We need to apply our minds adequately to the report so that we don’t just come here with something that we have not applied our minds to.”

Madonsela’s report found that Zuma and his family had unduly benefited from the upgrades to his private homestead in Nkandla.

SAPA