BREAKING: Ghaleb Cachalia, son of struggle stalwarts Amina & Yusuf Cachalia has been unveiled as the DA’s Ekurhuleni mayoral candidate.

Ghaleb DA

“Throughout my life, I believed the ANC embodied these values. It was where I put my faith for a better life for all South Africans. It was the party that enshrined my values when Nelson Mandela signed our constitution into law in 1996.

But sadly, after 22 years of ANC government, we have been betrayed. The ANC has changed, and the ANC of Jacob Zuma is not the ANC of Nelson Mandela.

I accept this DA nomination, not just because I’m leaving the ANC, but because the ANC has left me.

The time has come for change and the DA is the vehicle to deliver that change.”

– Ghaleb Cachalia

ANC stalwart says Zuma must go (Youtube-Clip)

“18 April 2016 – The ANC launched its election manifesto in Port Elizabeth this weekend, amid growing calls for President Jacob Zuma to resign. Struggle stalwart Denis Goldberg has been openly critical of Zuma’s leadership and has called on him to step down” (eNCA, 2016).

Zack Mwekassa: “The things I have gone through are heavy on my mind” (Youtube-Clip)

“Two weeks ago, car-jackers tried to kill Zack Mwekassa in South Africa. The gun clicked when the trigger was pulled but nothing happened. When the criminal went to fix his gun, he accidentally ejected the clip instead. Mwekassa ran for his life.  It is just the latest incident in a storied life, one which has packed more than its fair share of trials into his thirty years. He fled his native Congo when rebel groups kidnapped and beat him for refusing to join them. He subsequently survived a venomous snake bite, a stabbing and a volcanic eruption before making his way to South Africa, where he now lives. Some memories haunt him, particularly things he saw as a young man at the height of the Congo Civil War. Sometimes, he says, the memories feel too hard to bear. But so far he has borne up, powered through and succeeded. He has been heavyweight champion of Africa, won an intercontinental boxing title and had a crack at the GLORY world light-heavyweight championship. On Saturday April 16, he will fight in the headline fight of the GLORY SUPERFIGHT SERIES 29 card in Copenhagen, Denmark. The fight airs live and exclusively worldwide on UFC Fight Pass, at 1pm ET and on demand thereafter.The SUPERFIGHT SERIES card is followed by GLORY 29 COPENHAGEN, headlined by welterweight champion Nieky Holzken against challenger Yoann Kongolo. It airs live on ESPN 3 in the US and re-airs at 7pm on ESPN 2″ (GloryWorldSeries, 2016).

A look into how the American and British Companies defied the embargo and UN sanctions against the South African Apartheid Government in the 1970s and 1980s

sa-anti-apartheid-poster

This here will be about how American and British interest we’re in the draconian Apartheid regime in South Africa in 1970s and 1980s. I been looking into how businesses at the time went through hoops and not caring about the United Nations Sanctions and resolution 418 of 4th November 1977 states this:

Determines, having regard to the policies and acts of the South African Government, that the acquisition by South Africa of arms and related material constitutes, a threat to the maintenance of international peace and security; Decides that all States shall cease forthwith  any provisions to South Africa of arms and related materiel of all types, including the sale of transfer of weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, para military police equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, and shall cease as well the provision of all types of equipment and supplies and grants of licensing arrangements for the manufacture of the aforementioned” (UN, 1977).

So with that in mind, we can see how businesses of United States and Britain started and worked as subsidiaries in South Africa during the Apartheid, where the instances of FORD Motors and Leyland Vehicles we’re produced and used by the Police under the worst atrocities of a regime who used their laws, security agencies to harass the majority; while keeping the minority rulers and their economic incentive intact by any means. So that big business and other ones defied the Sanctions and even collaborated with necessary arms, cars and other procurement for the totalitarian state; shows how far the Corporation goes for profit and serve even governments who has no quarrel with prosecuting innocent citizens. Therefore the history of these corporations and their dealings should come to light and be questioned. As business today does the same under regimes that are totalitarian and militaristic with the favor of elite and harassing the opposition. That is why we can see at the tactics of the 1970s and 1980s and see how they might be used today.

So with that introduction take a look at my findings and hope you find it interesting.

1959_new-age-aid

How to start the discussion:

“Johannesburg Star (South African daily), Nov. 26, 1977, at 15. See also 1978 Hearings, supra note 13, at 846 (statement of John Gaetsewe, General Secretary of the banned South African Congress of Trade Unions) (“The ending of foreign investment in South Africa … is a means of undermining the power of the apartheid regime. Foreign investment is a pillar of the whole system which maintains the virtual slavery of the Black workers in South Africa.”); Christian Sci. Monitor, Feb. 21, 1984, at 25 (statement by Winnie Mandela, wife of imprisoned African National Congress leader Nelson Mandela)” (Hopkins, 1985).

Some money earned by the SADF at the time:

“According to official SADF accounts, the money that would have been recouped from the sale of ivory would flow back into funding the Unita rebels. However, Breytenbach knew that in the year 1986/1987 alone, the SADF’s assistance to Unita through military intelligence totalled R400 million (ZAR2005=R2,5 billion) and this excluded the supply of almost all Unita’s hardware and fuel. It is therefore unlikely that this was the reason behind the SADF’s interest in ivory smuggling. It is more likely that the potential for self-enrichment that this presented to SADF officers was enormous. General Chris Thirion, Former Deputy Chief of Staff Intelligence, agrees and suspects that Savimbi was in fact over-funded at the time” (Van Vuren, 2006).

Africa 1963-64

How much RSA used on Military Equipment during Apartheid in the 1980s:

“According to evidence presented to the UN Security Council arms embargo committee in 1984, out of its annual total arms procurement budget of some R1.62 billion over R900 million was to be spent on arms purchases from overseas” (…)”This R900 million is spent on the procurement of arms directly by the regime from overseas and via the private sector. No official figures are published about how much is actually spent on direct imports of armaments. However, it can be estimated from figures contained in an in-depth survey by the Johannesburg Sunday Times in July 1982 that imports from overseas were 15 per cent of defence spending which then stood at R3,320 million per annum” (AAM, 1985).

How that happen:

“Those breaches of the arms embargo which have been exposed have also revealed the myth of South Africa’s self-sufficiency. Equipment smuggled into South Africa include weapons such as machine guns, rifles and pistols as well as spares and components for them. In a trial at the Old Bailey, London, in October 1982, the Court was informed that South African efforts to produce components for pre-war machine guns had not been successful. This points to the serious deficiencies in the quality and reliability of even minor items manufactured in South Africa” (AAM, 1985).

Export of R.J. Electronics International:

“Britain’s refusal to strictly implement the UN arms embargo and its continuing military collaboration in various fields are not totally surprising since much of this arises out of its traditional relationship with South Africa” (…)”They failed to re-appear in Court on 22 October 1984 and the following weekend gave a press conference. At it, Colonel Botha disclosed that they had operated as undercover agents for five years and “had saved the country at least R5 million on purchases of vital equipment”. Metelerkamp claimed he was only a consultant to Kentron and was the Managing Director of R J Electronics International. However, it emerged that he had been employed by Kentron up to a month prior to his arrest, and R J Electronics International was “a company used to purchase illicit arms” (AAM, 1985).

Other Examples:

“One cargo of FN rifles was initially exported by air to Red Baron Ltd at an address in Zurich before being forwarded to South Africa. This company, however, was not Swiss, but registered in England. Its directors were Mr Trinkler and two others who had also been directors of Kuehne and Nagel in Britain” (…)”The most controversial case was that of the British Aerospace naval reconaissance aircraft, the Coastguarder. In Hay 1984 it was disclosed that British Aerospace had been approached by the South African Government and that initial discussions had taken place concerning the purchase of eight aircraft. These were to replace the Shackleton aircraft which were having to be phased out. The South African authorities had sought to evade the arms embargo by forming a Coastguard service as a civilian authority through which the order for the aircraft would be placed. Repeated efforts to secure from the Government an undertaking that the Coastguarder would not be granted licence for export to South Africa met with the response that “it would not be proper for me to offer a definitive view now on the hypothetical question on the issue of a licence for the export of an aircraft such as the Coastguarder to South Africa” (AAM, 1985).

Shell Corporation working with the Regime:

The South Africans agreed and supplied a cash advance that allowed the traders to purchase a tanker, shipping company and the required insurance. The tanker docked in Kuwait and filled its tanks with oil owned by Shell. The oil was registered for delivery in France. However, en route to Europe from the Gulf the tanker stopped in Durban and off-loaded almost all of its oil crude oil—almost 180,000 tonnes—with the South Africans paying the difference between the purchase price and the fees it had advanced for the purchase of the tanker. The Salem was then filled up with water in order to create the impression that it was still laden with oil. Off the coast of West Africa (Senegal), at one of the deepest points of the Atlantic, the ship was scuttled and the crew, who were prepared for the evacuation, were conveniently ‘rescued’. They had hoped to make an extra $24 million off the insurance claim for the lost oil. Following investigations by the insurance company the main perpetrators were prosecuted. The biggest loser next to Shell was South Africa, asit agreed to pay the Dutch multinational US$30 million (ZAR2005=R436 million) in an out-of-court settlement. Shell was left to carry a remaining loss of US$20 million. The use of corrupt middlemen had cost South Africa almost half a billion rand. There was no prosecution in South Africa of the officials at the SFF who had authorised South Africa’s procurement of a full tanker of oil from three novice (criminal) entrepreneurs” (Van Vuren, 2006).

Leyland-SA

British Subsidiaries in South Africa:

“Many of these subsidiaries are British. They include Leyland (Landrovers and Trucks); ICI (through its 40 per cent holding in AECI) (Ammunition and Explosives); Trafalgar House (through Cementation Engineering) (artillery shells); ICL (Computers); GEC including Marconis (Military Communications Equipment); Lontho (aircraft franchises); Plessey (Military Communications Equipment); BP and Shell (oil and other petroleum products for the military and police)” (…)”An impression of the full extent of the role of British subsidiaries in South Africa in undermining the arms embargo can be obtained from studying Appendix C. This is a list of British companies with subsidiaries in South Africa which are also known to be engaged in the manufacture of military and related equipment” (AAM, 1985).

British Mercenaries:

“British mercenaries, some recruited. originally for the forces of the illegal Smith regime, are serving in a number of South African Defence Force units, including the infamous “32 Battallion” operating out of Namibia into Angola. A British mercenary was killed in the South African commando raid on the residence of South African refugees in Maputo, Mozambique, in January 1981” (AAM, 1985).

“British Government policy so far has been to grant permission for Officers to serve in the South African Defence Forces.” (…)”This was explained by Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Heseltine, in a letter to the Rt Hon Denis Healey:

“An Officer is required to resign his commission before joining the forces of a country that does not owe allegiance to the Crown, and if he did not do so then the commission would be removed. As you will appreciate, this is the only power that we can exercise over an officer who has already retired from the Services. Guidance is given to officers about these procedures before they retire, but no specific recommendations are made about which countries’ Armed Forces an officer should join; nor do I believe that it would be right to do so.” (AAM, 1985).

GM ZA Apartheid

American Businesses under Apartheid:

Approximately 350 of the most prominent companies in the United States, including more than half of the Fortune 500’s top one hundred firms, operate subsidiaries in South Africa [18]. Another 6000 do business there through sales agents and distributers [19]. The United States holds fifty-seven percent of all foreign holdings on the Johannesburg stock exchange, including gold mines, mining houses, platinum mines, and diamonds [20]. The State Department estimated that U.S. direct investment amounted to $2.3 billion in 1983, down from the $2.8 billion calculated by the South African Institute of Race Relations for 1982 [21]. Other estimates put overall American investment, including loans and gold stocks, at $14 billion [22]” (…)”rcent [25]. U.S. exports to South Africa, however, grew from approximately R1.2 billion in 1979 to R2.7 billion in 1981 [26]. As a result, the United States emerged as the Republic’s largest trading partner [27]. Apart from its quantitative impact, U.S. business investment has a qualitative impact disproportionate to its financial value” (…)”John Purcell of Goodyear concurred, asserting that economic pressures will not encourage nonviolent social change in South Africa; rather, this will be brought about by “economic growth, expanded contact with the outside, and time” ((Hopkins, 1985)

aa_sun_19760715_p007-002

Ford sold cars to the Apartheid regime:

“Ford Directed and Controlled its South African Policies from the United States, Exported Equipment from the United States, and Acted to Circumvent the United States Sanctions Regime: (New York Southern Cout Case, P: 65, 2014)

“Thus, despite the tightening of U.S. trade sanctions in February 1978, Ford U.S. still announced a “large infusion[] of capital into its South African subsidiary. Ford injected $8 million for upkeep and retooling” (New York Southern Court Case, P: 67, 2014).

“Ford support was significant: “[B]etween 1973 and 1977 [Ford] sold 128 cars and 683 trucks directly to the South African Ministry of Defense and 646 cars and 1,473 trucks to the South African police. Ford sold at least 1,582 F series U.S.-origin trucks to the police” (…)”Despite the prohibitions, Ford continued to supply vehicles to the South African security forces with the purpose of facilitating apartheid crimes. Ford denied that its continued sales to the South African security forces ran counter to the U.S. prohibitions, on the basis that the vehicles did not contain parts or technical data of U.S. origin” (…)”Notably, into the 1980s, Ford sold vehicles that did not need to be “converted” by the apartheid government for military or police use but were already specialized before leaving the plant in South Africa” (…)”Ford built a limited number of XR6 model Cortinas known as “interceptors” that were sold almost exclusively to the police. The XR6 was special because it had three Weber model double carburetors, as opposed to all other Cortinas that had only one double carburetor” (…)”Ford knew that the normal market for these vehicles was the security forces. The vehicles were deliberately pre-equipped with armor and military fixtures and designed for easy modification by the security forces to add additional defensive and offensive features” (…)”By making profits which they knew could only come from their encouragement of the security forces’ illicit operations through the sale of vehicles, parts, designs, and services, Ford acquired a stake in the criminal enterprise that was the apartheid regime” (New York Southern Case, P: 71-77, 2014).

hans-haacke-a-breed-apart-1978-6

Leyland under Apartheid:

“The British government now virtually owns British Leyland and therefore controls the company’s operations in South Africa. Yet it has done little in practice to press for the rights of black workers to organize through trade unions, or for the recognition of the unions for collective bargaining purposes” (…)”The South African “branch” is Leyland’s biggest operation in the world outside of the U.K. At present it is the 8th largest car manufacturer (holding approximately 5% of the market) and the 7th largest commercial vehicle manufacturer (holding approximately 5,5% of the market) in South Africa. Despite the depressed condition of the South African Market it sold 1959 vehicles in January-February of 1977 alone” (…)”B.L.S.A. has massive contracts with the South African state. It is one of the chief suppliers of the South African Defense Force, providing not only trucks and landrovers (which form the backbone of anti-guerrilla operations) but also armored personnel carriers. Of course, the figures for these contracts are never made public” (…)”For example, in June 1976 it was announced that B.L.S.A. had won a £1.9millon order for 250 trucks from the Cape Provincial Authority” (…)”As Leyland itself have argued , It “must conform, it not entirely” to South African government and established wishes” (Coventry Anti-Apartheid, 1977).

This here is not easy to finish up as the implications of this deals and arrangement used to support a government that oppressed and detained the majority. This Apartheid government did it all openly and with a clear message that the white minority should rule, while the rest should serve them.

In that context these businesses earned good amount of cash and profits for their stakeholders and their shareholders. While their products and procured services by the state we’re used to oppress majority of people in South Africa. We can surely see the amount of money and how this have affected the society and given way for the government of the time to continue with the process of detaining and harassing the majority of South Africans. This could not have happen if there wasn’t a helping hand from businesses and their subsidiaries. This here is just a brief look into it.

Certainly this should be studied even more and become clear evidence of how heartbreaking it is to know how certain businesses and people owning them will profit on suffering of fellow human beings. That is why I myself shed a light on it, to show the extent of disobedience of the UN Resolution and also what these corporations does in regimes that harassing and oppressing fellow citizens for their background, creed, tribe etc. It’s just ghastly and makes my tummy vomit. But that is just me, hope you got some indication of how they did their business and served the Apartheid government. Peace.

Reference:

Anti-Apartheid Movement – ‘How Britian Arms Apartheid – A memorandum for presentation to her Majesty’s Government’ (1985)

Coventry Anti-Apartheid Movement – ‘Leyland in Britain and in South Africa’ (1977)

Hopkins, Sheila M. – ‘AN ANALYSIS OF U.S.-SOUTH AFRICAN RELATIONS IN THE 1980s: HAS ENGAGEMENT BEEN CONSTRUCTIVE?’ (1985) – Journal of Comparative Business and Capital Market Law 7 (1985) 89-115, North Holland

United States, New York Southern Court: Case 1:02-md-01499-SAS Document 280-1 Filed 08/08/14

Van Vuren, Hennie – ‘Apartheid grand corruption – Assessing the scale of crimes of profit from 1976 to 1994’ (2006)

Keeping It Real: Drama As MPs Debate Zuma Impeachment; Female Minister Falls Asleep In Parliament (Youtube-Clip)

“In South Africa, Members of Parliament debate impeaching President Jacob Zuma as a female MP falls asleep” (Adeola Fayehun, 2016).

ANC structures joint statement on Zuma-Nkandla matter (Youtube-Clip)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSwFCAzwDso

 

My letter to President Zuma after the Con Court judgement and the outcome of the Motion of Impeachment in the RSA Parliament recently

zuma-better-life

Oslo, 13th April 2016.

Dear His Excellency President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma!

I hope you are okay, not really though, but the human parts of me does. As I know you eaten for long while and is far from starving. I am not somebody you or your loyal cronies in the African National Congress listen to, as I am the man you had hired to wash your Amphitheatre or clean away the grass there or painting part some of the walls that need a fresh paint at Nkandla village. I am sure you would hire me to clean your fire-pool. So I understand if you will not listen to my reason, but I hope somebody does.

I know that you have gotten rid of the people who also wanted access to power, as you have done with Julius Malema as he was young and vibrant, while you we’re busy getting married and getting new children with the new wives. That is why you have a village in Nkandla. You have so many house and private clinic there for your service. You even swallowed Thabo Mbeki the intellectual, who muffled his career and said yes to let the finally ANC eat, and eat heavy. As you have done for a while now, maybe time to let go of the plate? The gig is up?

President Zuma you we’re able to get rid of Mbeki and make is legacy be mixed up in a bad-deal and PR for supervision of Zimbabwe and their Government of National Unity (GNU) where President Mugabe (ZANU-PF) still where the Executive, why the winner of the election became his deputy Morgan Tsvangirai (MDC-T). That helped to tarnish the powers of Mbeki and make you rise as the deputy of Mbeki to block his place as the executive of South Africa. The way you did it was to sell the “the Arms-Deal” to Mbeki, and let him swallow the scandal.

KZA Farm

You have always used reason to get away from scandals, corruption cases and maladministration of government funds and procedures. You have always stead steady with the allegation and able to deflect it. The share amount of cases and the times you’re named in curious cases is staggering for an Executive of a Nation. If you we’re a famer I would expect you to act respectfully to your animals and use your dirt to produce quality food. But you happen to be the Executive, the President and His Excellency! With those titles comes the certainties of honourable acts that are expect, not only by your constituency, but also by the rules and laws of Parliament, as well as the famous guideline of the nation, a constitution.

As you know the Constitution set precedence for you role and position Honourable Jacob G. Zuma. You have certain abilities and opportunity with that position, but at the same time; which is hard for you to see the extent of that power.

Yamoussoukro

The Nkandla is a promising corrupt case and all, but you have not honoured the power you have had; Honourable Zuma you should have emulated late President Félix Houphouët-Boigny of Cote d’Ivoire or Ivory Coast in 1983, the honourable Houphouët-Boigny moved the Capital of the Country to his village Yamoussoukro from the well-known town of Abidjan and build a majestic town out it. By two years even LA Times said there was more traffic-lights then people in Yamoussoukro. You might have built a village in Kwa-Zulu Natal for yourself, but in the prospect of other rulers of recent times. So when you first were corrupted you could have staged something more out of it.

You have already displaced arrogance towards the rest of the Parliament or the National Assembly. As you have over a few years deflected this case, as you also does not discuss the matter of how you got rid of Mbeki. Even if you proclaimed near the end of his last tenure that you we’re his man. Something you we’re not.

Two and Half Gupta

Other than Nkandla, you have spoils with the Gupta Family and their involvement into politics. As there been said and asked for covering if the Gupta family and their Oakbay Resources and Energy; especially when we can consider the sudden axing of Nene Nhanhla as Finance Minister, while David Van Rooyen had the position for three days or so, before a third Minister Pravin Gordhan was the excellent choice. All happen under two-weeks in December 2015, and made the already fragile markets react and also suspect business from the government and executive into lights.

As the questions for a Private Jet for the Executive for 4bn Rand in November 2015, that Minister Nhanhla would not accept. Some says that the reason for his axing, what do you say Honourable Zuma? Or was the Gupta’s behind it all?

There should also be worrying for a President, at this day and age: to have over 500,000 searches on google for you if you type “Zuma Corruption”. That is worrying isn’t it honourable Zuma?

Though I am sure you will deflect it all, it is a western paradigm and that you should not be in court as you deserve the same honour as Richard Nixon in his time. Well, Nixon didn’t build a village for himself with tax-money, didn’t have shady business connections with Gupta investors, Swaziland connections and so on. You have treated the Executive Position to earn money and eat for yourself.

south-africa-paper_2743092b

Your legacy will not be how you established ANC as more as liberation movement, but a fully-fledged political party. Instead like so many liberation movements, you have started to eat and forgotten why they fought against the oppression. So as you can now payback the monies used for “Security Upgrades” of Nkandla homestead. While you might gotten enough votes in the National Assembly as the ANC members of Parliament is loyal to you and not the Constitution apparently. But I am the guy who you hire to paint your walls at Nkandla, so I don’t expect you ever to listen or read my words. I am a pundit and nobody. As I presume my existence in the shadow, let it be certain, if you even survive your career as the Executive while sophisticated stealing of government funds. You still will not leave a legacy and the name Zuma will not be standing in for-front of well-renowned character those parents wants to teach their kids to emulate.

Why I say this is because the amount of scandals, the way you brought yourself to power through the ANC and the way you have used the government organizations to access wealth. Creating networks for your own gain and not the general public as you’re supposed to as an Executive. Also by facilitate and use all courts and time of the state in your name.

I got to recommendations to you, though I know you only listen to Court judgements or verdicts, as this is merely a suggestion to what you could do now. And with that in mind, I know you won’t listen to any of the advice. As they are suggestions and not something you should follow as the constitution, but hey; parts of that you don’t follow either. Let’s skip that and give you the advice. 

nxesiquotes-1438625825-5

Here are my two recommendations to you:

First: You should have followed the EFF and DA motion and stepped down, resigned and leave with valour of honour, as possible to give space to your party to sort itself out after the debacle with the Nkandla and Gupta connection you have. As the Con-Court set standards for you and that you did not listen to Public Protectorate considering the case.

Second: Following President Houphouët-Boigny of Ivory Coast, continue to build Nkandla into a magnificent city with more streetlights then people in Nkandla, Kwa-Zulu Natal. So if you’re really corrupted Honourable then ever President Zuma you should make the home and town more extravagant. Extravagant for Nkandla in the sense send in a motion to the National Assembly to move the Capital from Pretoria to Nkandla; as a gift to the proud folks of Kwa-Zulu Natal. So you can prove the value of the constituency you reside. Be a truly African President that South Africa ever has had.  So quit that meagre estimated building of Nkandla Village Project and secure that instead becomes Nkandla Metropolitan City Project. So the ANC big project before next election will be to make Nkandla a City and trading centre, not just a hangout place for the wives, kids and grand-children of the Executive.

Honourable President Zuma, as I expect you not to ever read it or the loyal cronies in the inner circle of the ANC. But it should be put into consideration as the expected ANC Stalwarts and ANC Veterans who has spoken against the presidency and the Executive asked politely to step down. So I am sure the ANC Party and ANC Organization listen more to them then to me. An you should listen to them, because their vocal about their grievances together with Civil Society Organizations, Churches and Opposition Parties feels about the codes of conduct and justice of your part in the National Assembly and continuing to be their Executive. Peace.

Best Regards

The Writer of the blog MinBane.

Press Release: COPE Withdraws from Parliamentary Activities (11.04.2016)

Cope Press Release P1Cope Press Release P2

Mosiuoa Lekota explains why Cope decided to withdraw from parliament (Youtube-Clip)

“The Congress of the People says the party has decided to withdraw from parliament. Cope announced its withdrawal in Boksburg on Gauteng’s east rand. This after the constitutional court ruled against President Zuma and parliament on the Nkandla matter” (SABC Digital News, 2016)

A look into President Zuma’s two major scandals: The Nkandla village Project and the triple Finance Minister Mystery of December 2015!

zuma-better-life

“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,” – President Zuma in the National Assembly in 2012 (De Wet, 2012).

His Exellency Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, the current President of South Africa is under a hard storm and heavy rain. There been a long time waiting for the whole sky falling on his bear head, but that has not occurred.

First the basic parts of the Nkandla scandal and then the Finance Minister saga, as they are both important to the lost trust between the Parliament, big parts of the people and the President. There is many reasons for that, how he has used government funds to build a village in KwaZulu-Natal while being President and how the connection to rich business-men have tarnished the reputation as the hand-out seem to be given for more economic offers from the rich family of the Gupta’s. And that is worrying. Take a look!

ConCourt-to-issue-judgement-on-Nkandla-on-Thursday-630x330

The Nkandla homestead has made the Presidency to an issue. When the Department of Works in a report on the 2013 stated this:

“The appointed service providers have probably overcharged the State by inflating prices for the goods or services they rendered” (Department Public Works, P: 14, 2013). The DPW has undertaken an intern investigation and employees if they did any misconduct. The Security upgrades is set to be R 71,212,612.77 is at the time of the investigation by the Task Team. There have been no public funds in use for building and upgrading the presidential residence. The 5-ha state land have cost R 135,208,022.51 in departmental operation needs (SAPS and DOD personnel) (Department Public Works, P: 14, 2013). The Prestige project A for upgraded of the Presidential housing in KwaZulu-Natal according to the information from the DPW going to cost R 206,420,644.28 at the time in 28th December 2012, Jeremy Cronin Deputy Minister of the Public Works: “At the very least we need to make sure, without revealing the details, nature of security ……, we need to make sure as far as the tenders issued by Public Works, those were done clearly, there were no inexplicable overruns on costs” (Department Public Works, P: 17, 2013). That is just saying that there for three years ago! There is more!

The Public Proctor Said this in March 2014:

“There was no legal authority for the expenditure that was allegedly incurred by the state in respect of upgrades made at the President’s private residence in the name of security. Even if there was authority, the upgrades were excessive or “opulent” and transcended such authority” (Public Protector, P: 8, 2014).

The Same report also states this:

President Zuma improperly benefited from the measures implemented in the name of security which include none security comforts the Visitors’ Centre, such as the swimming pool, amphitheatre, and the cattle kraal with culvert and chicken run. The private medical clinic at the family’s doorstep will also benefit the family forever. The acts and omissions that allowed this to happen constitute unlawful and improper conduct and maladministration” (…)”The conduct of the DPW leading to the failure to resolve the issue of items earmarked for the owner’s cost transparently, including the failure to report back on the swimming pool question after the 11 May 2011 meeting and the disappearance of the letter proposing an apportionment of costs, constitutes improper conduct and maladministration” (Public Protector, P: 57-58, 2014).

Do you wonder how the President Zuma could afford his own swimming pool and amphitheater?

“Funds were reallocated from the Inner City Regeneration and the Dolomite Risk Management Programmes of the DPW. Due to a lack of proper demand management and planning service delivery programmes of the DPW were negatively affected. This was in violation of section 237 of the Constitution and the Batho Pele White Paper and accordingly constitutes improper conduct and maladministration” (Public Protector, P: 62, 2014).

His Conduct of the Nkandla Affair:

“While his conduct could accordingly be legitimately construed as misleading Parliament, it appears to have been a bona fide mistake and I am accordingly unable to find that his conduct was in violation of paragraph 2 of the Executive Ethics Code. His statement is also consistent with those made by the Ministers of Public Works throughout the public outcry over the Nkandla expenditure. I am accordingly unable to find that his conduct was in violation of paragraph 2 of the Executive Ethics Code” (Public Protector, P: 64, 2014).

MoF South Africa 16.03.2016

Here is what the Constitutional Court main parts of the verdict on Nkandla:

“The Court thus held that the National Assembly’s resolution, based on the Minister’s findings exonerating the President from liability, was inconsistent with the Constitution and unlawful. The Court also held that, by failing to comply with the Public Protector’s order, the President failed to “uphold, defend and respect the Constitution because a duty to repay the money was specifically imposed on him through the Public Protector’s constitutional power” (…)”The Court ordered the National Treasury to determine the reasonable portion that the President must pay for the five non-security items listed above and report back to the Court within 60 days. The Court ordered the President to make payment 45 days thereafter. The President was also ordered to reprimand the Ministers involved in the expenditure at Nkandla. Finally, the Court declared that the remedial action taken by the Public Protector is binding. The President, Minister, and Speaker were ordered to pay the applicants’ costs, including those of two counsel” (News24, 2016).

Cost-of-Nkandla

Now that we have taken the major one and eaten the swollen corrupted minded on his homestead of KwaZulu-Natal and chopped up some beef. Stir-frying it and mixing it in a pot and then serving it, while it is still juicy. The certainty of the malpractice and reassure that a swimming-pool, a hen-house, a medical clinic, a amphitheater and other building projects still not considered safety features. That is good thing, if not I would get my house in order and get the same for my own concern with thieves in the neighborhood.

Well, now that I have watered that down and ready for some more rain. Let us get the story of how the Finance Minister all of sudden was not “good” enough for his post. It will be interesting.

Two and Half Gupta

This been said about Nene Nklanhla:Mr. Nene has been since 2009 among respected people on the international scene that succeeded to another known and appreciated personality, Trevor Manuel (1996-2008), the second Minister of Finance of Nelson Mandela” (…)”His appointment could constitute a test for the “rand“, the South African currency, under pressure for months” (…)”He has inherited from a difficult situation with a decreasing growth revised at 2,1 % this year, far below 7 % required to reduce the chronic unemployment in a country the working population of which quickly increases” (La Redaction, 2015).

What he discussed in October 2015:

“Financial market volatility is high and capital inflows into emerging markets have slowed. This has raised borrowing rates for emerging markets globally” (…)”Honourable Members, bold action is needed. Restoring the momentum of growth requires policy certainty, confidence and trust, shared between government, business, workers and households” (…)”The absence of state capacity, that is, of the services and protections that people in rich countries take for granted, is one of the major causes of poverty and inequality around the world. Without effective states working with active and involved citizens, there is little chance for the growth that is needed to abolish global poverty” (Nhlanhla, 2015).

President’s Zuma Reason for sacking his minister and appointing another one:

“Mr Nene has done well since his appointment as Minister of Finance during a difficult economic climate” (…)”I have decided to appoint a Member of Parliament, Mr David Van Rooyen, as the new Minister of Finance. Mr Van Rooyen serves as a Whip of the Standing Committee on Finance and as Whip of the Economic Transformation Cluster” (Zuma, 2015).

Reaction to the Sacking:

“There seems to be no doubt that the President fired Nene because he would not allow Zuma and some of his cadres to spend money recklessly, for personal gain, and in so doing risk the integrity of the Treasury. Nene insisted on tight fiscal discipline in the face of a growing deficit and a worrying economic forecast” (…)”Nene did not bow to political pressure. He would not sanction the revision of a deal to buy new aircraft for South African Airways. The airline’s board chairperson, Dudu Myeni (who is also chair of the Jacob Zuma Foundation), was unhappy and appears to have used her personal relationship with the President to influence this decision” (…)”Nene was also cautious not to back a R1 trillion nuclear building deal, which Zuma was personally invested in” (IFAISA, 2015). EFF statement said this: “Zuma has appointed him because he knows that Van Rooyen will not stand up to him when he wants to do wrong things. Van Rooyen will be so eternally grateful, absolutely starstruck that anything Zuma asks for will go. Van Rooyen will be prepared to even approve further upgrades to Zuma’s Nkandla home by putting a private zoo that has exotic animals like domesticated tigers” (…)“The EFF has it on record that Nene has been moved because he refused illegal instructions from Zuma and his friends in both business and state owned enterprises. Nene refused to give South African Airways (SAA) guarantees and bailout when Zuma’s girlfriend and chairperson of the board requested it. Nene also refused to buy Zuma a new luxurious private jet and declined to grant Zuma’s staff exemptions from using expensive hotels and flying first class” (Mbuyiseni, 2015).

So to give a little timeline, Finance Minister Nene Nhanhla was fired on the 9th December 2015 and then on the same day Daniel Van Rooyen was hired on the 9th December 2015. With a backlash from NGOs and other parties on the unknown and nobody hired to be Finance Minister in South Africa. Hon. Van Rooyen a grand minister instead of former Finance Minister Nhanhla.
Zuma Adressed the Matter in statement on 12th December:

“Rumour: Mr Nene was redeployed because of the Airbus deal and Ms Myeni’s displeasure. Media reports that Mr Nhlanhla Nene is being redeployed because the SAA Board chairperson was unhappy with the National Treasury directives to SAA with regards to the Airbus deal or any other matter is a malicious fabrication. Mr Nene as has been explained, is South Africa’s candidate to head up the African Regional Centre of the New Development Bank/BRICS Bank” (Zuma, 2015).

Reaction to David Van Rooyen:

“There are many stakeholders, including the South African Institute of Professional Accountants (SAIPA), who are ready to engage with the Minister so that as a collective we can address these challenges given the short time left between now and the next National Budget announcement in February 2016” (…)”We would like to remind the Minister that because of our hugely disproportionate tax base – with only a fraction of citizens at the high earnings threshold – aggressively increasing taxes would be the equivalent of killing the goose that lays the golden egg” (…)”We acknowledge that the Minister wants to address equality by means of taxation but would caution that it is not taxation alone that will drive these imperatives – in the budget, we must spend within our means” (Ngawenya, 2015).

“The Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) says it is concerned by this week’s change in the post of minister of finance, as new minister David van Rooyen was sworn into the post yesterday” (…)“It is the JSE’s view that predictable and consistent leadership is needed if we are to address the recent downgrade of the country’s credit rating to near junk status, the patent economic slowdown, unsustainably high unemployment and rising inflation,” the stock exchange says in a statement” (…)“The JSE has worked closely with previous Finance Ministers and we will continue to work with the new Minister and the National Treasury to help South Africa realise the ambitions contained in the National Development Plan.  We look forward to hearing the Minister’s plans in this regard.” (…)”In a brief address at his swearing in ceremony, at the Union Buildings in Pretoria yesterday, Van Rooyen said he would engage with National Treasury adding that it is important to “simplify issues of public finance to the public”. He also says he aims to “deal with myths around the ministry” and acknowledged that he is taking office at a time when emerging markets are facing difficult times” (Gilbert, 2015).

With the non-backing of Finance Minister of David Van Rooyen, President Zuma could not look at that and make more fuzz; he had to try to do something wise and get somebody who was more trusted then the controversial former Mayor. So after 4 days in office and getting his tag on the door of the Finance Ministry; David Van Rooyen was fired for being him and getting a too big office for his caliber and also taken away trustfulness of the South African economy. Therefore there came a third minister in to the same Post because President Zuma loves to reshuffle his cabinet.

Finance-Ministers-of-South-Africa-Nene-Van-Rooyen-Gordhan-1140x600

Zuma appoints his third Finance Minister under a week:

“On the 9th of December 2015, I announced the appointment of a new Minister of Finance, Mr David van Rooyen” (…)”I have appointed Mr Pravin Gordhan, the current Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs as the new Minister of Finance” (…)”Minister Gordhan will return to a portfolio that he had held proficiently during the fourth administration” (…)”I have also decided to appoint the current Minister of Finance, Mr David van Rooyen, as the new Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs” (Zuma, 2015).

So when all of this was over, there been a aftermath of speculation and also of foundling from outside sources that have altered the judgement of President Zuma to let go of Nene Nhanhla from his position in the cabinet and usher somebody else in, while having the freedom to make deals without thinking about economic deficit or the inflation rate of the country, as the former Finance Minister would conclude with.

Trevor Manuel stated this in late December 2015:

“It cannot be correct that there is an outside hand (and not the ruling party) that knows more than Cabinet does about unfolding events” (…)”clear from comments by Cabinet colleagues in the wake of Mr Nene’s dismissal was that when cabinet adjourned at about 6pm on Wednesday, December 9, neither he nor Cabinet had any inkling of what was to follow that evening” (…)”The breach of trust was not the first, but perhaps the last, straw that broke the camel’s back in the careless handling of a pivotal portfolio” (…)”Luthuli House needs to hear loud and clear that this man has to be held to account and we need people, men and women of good standing and stature, to do that job” (News24.com, 2015).

Oakbay Letter 08.04.2016 Gupta Family Saga South Africa

Another handpicked Finance Minister it seems Mr. Jones Mcebisi:

“Members of the Gupta family offered me the position of Minister of Finance to replace then-Minister Nene,” he said in a statement on Wednesday.“I rejected this out of hand. The basis of my rejection of their offer is that it makes a mockery of our hard earned democracy, the trust of our people and no one apart from the President of the Republic appoints ministers.” (Claymore, 2016).

SMS Threat after the Revelation:

“Please keep your own counsel. Martyrdom is best left to Christ”. This is the SMS Jonas reportedly received from a prominent businessman as he was drafting the statement that has rocked the nation” (Skade, 2016).

There been trying to Impeach President Zuma, here is motion from the letter from the Democratic Alliance asking for the motion of Impeachment of the Executive, which happens to be Jacob Zuma, ANC leader and the President of Republic of South Africa; here it is:

Impeachment of Zuma Letter Parliament 25.03.2016

How the voting went in the National Assembly:

“The motion, brought by the Democratic Alliance (DA) and fiercely backed by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and most small opposition parties, drew 143 votes in favour and 233 against” (ANA, 2016).

So the Impeachment from the Democratic Alliance went bad and the ANC voting for themselves and their leader. That failed sadly enough. So the situation is stagnating in one way as the National Assembly through the Power of ANC have kept him safe, legally, but with the ANC Veterans and Stalwarts speaking-up for him to resign. That happens together with ANC Branches distancing themselves from the Executive might help the cause to stop the man with no ethical or scruples coming to governmental funds to personal use. The man who can buy swimming-pool and amphitheater can easily use the funds to fund his family into businesses and use the governmental ties to gain economical gains in the country. Therefore he has close relationship to the businessmen of the Gupta Family and their businesses as their money is a great way of creating business for the grander Zuma Family. They can together make good money without too much work for themselves, but let the working-class pay for their wealth. So the aftermath of this is not over.

nkandla-takealot

ANC have to sides now, the ones for Zuma, the other one for his resignation. As the ones stand for loyalty to the Executive and the new Elite of the South Africa, while the ones standing for his resignation is for ethical, accountable and good governance for the South African Government that is built on the principal regime of the Constitution that President Zuma could less care about; he is more busy spending time with his family at the fire-pool while using the air-condition system bought by the RSA tax-money. Peace. 

Reference:

ANA – ‘Zuma impeachment motion fails’ (05.04.2016) link: http://www.enca.com/south-africa/zuma-stays-opposition-loses-impeachment-vote

Claymore, Ezra – ‘BREAKING: Mcebisi Jonas admits Guptas offered him Nhlanhla Nene’s job’ (16.03.2016) link: http://www.thesouthafrican.com/breaking-mcebisi-jonas-admits-guptas-offered-him-nhlanhla-nenes-job/

Department Public Works – Task Team Investigation Report on Security Measures at Nkandla (19.12.2013), Republic of South Africa

De Wet, Phillip – ‘Zuma defends his Nkandla ‘family home’ in Parliament’ (12.11.2012) link: http://mg.co.za/article/2012-11-15-zuma-defends-his-nkandla-family-home

Gilbert, Paula – ‘JSE concerned about finance minister’s dismissal’ (11.12.2015) link: http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148543

La Redaction – ‘Nhlanhla Nene: the very first «Black» South African Minister of Finance’ (27.05.2015) link: http://www.africatopsuccess.com/en/2014/05/27/nhlanhla-nene-the-very-first-black-south-african-minister-of-finance/

Mbuyiseni, Quintin Ndozi – ‘Nhlanhla Nene axed for saying no to illegal instructions – EFF’ (09.12.2015) link: http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politics/nhlanhla-nene-axed-for-saying-no-to-illegal-instru

Nhlanhla, Nene – ‘Medium Term Budget Policy Statement 2015 – Nhlanhla Nene’ (21.10.2015) link: http://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/medium-term-budget-policy-statement-2015–nhlanhla

Ngwenya, Faith – ‘AN OPEN LETTER TO THE HONOURABLE MINISTER OF FINANCE, DAVID VAN ROOYEN’ (11.12.2015) link: http://www.saipa.co.za/pressreleases/416648/open-letter-honourable-minister-finance-david-van-rooyen

News24 – ‘FULL JUDGMENT: Constitutional Court rules on Nkandla’ (31.03.2016) link: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/full-text-constitutional-court-rules-on-nkandla-public-protector-20160331

News24 – ‘Manuel hints at ‘outside hand’ in Nene dismissal’ (20.12.2015) link: http://www.sabreakingnews.co.za/2015/12/20/manuel-hints-at-outside-hand-in-nene-dismissal/

Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa (IFAISA) – ‘STATEMENT ON THE REMOVAL OF NHLANHLA NENE AS SOUTH AFRICA’S MINISTER OF FINANCE’ (10.12.2015) link: http://accountabilitynow.org.za/statement-on-the-removal-of-nhlanha-nene-as-south-africas-minister-of-finance/

Skade, Thandi – ‘Jonas received SMS threat ahead of Gupta revelation: report’ (17.03.2016) link: http://www.destinyconnect.com/2016/03/17/jonas-received-sms-threat-ahead-of-gupta-revelation-report/

The Public Protector – ‘Secure in Comfort’ Report no. 25 of 2013/14 (March 2014)

Zuma, Jacob – ‘Statement by President Jacob Zuma on the appointment of new Finance Minister’ (09.12.2015) link: http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/pebble.asp?relid=21217

Zuma, Jacob – ‘Presidency corrects malicious rumours about SAA, National Treasury and Ministerial deployments’ (12.12.2015) link: http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/pebble.asp?relid=21227

Zuma, Jacob – ‘Announcement of new Ministers of Finance and COGTA’ (13.12.2015) link: http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/pebble.asp?relid=21231