Arms report clears government

The South African government has been cleared of any wrongdoing in a controversial multi-billion dollar arms deal. The three agencies investigating the arms procurement package - the public prosecutor, the national directorate of public prosecutions and the auditor-general - said in a report released on Thursday that "no evidence was found of any improper or unlawful conduct by the government".

"The irregularities and improprieties referred to in the findings as contained in this report, point to the conduct of certain officials of the government departments involved and cannot in out view, be ascribed to the president or the ministers involved in their capacity as members of the ministers' committee or cabinet. There are therefore no grounds to suggest that the government's contracting position is flawed," said the report.

Briefing parliamentarians on Thursday, the national director of public prosecutions, Bulelani Ngcuka, said: "Whilst there may be certain individuals and department officials who use their position to derive some form of benefit from the acquisition process, which might render them criminally liable, the integrity of our government and its institutions is unquestionable."

He added that some claims of corruption involving MPs and prominent South Africans in the controversial arms deal - intended to modernise the country's armed forces with the purchasing of aircraft, helicopters, corvettes and submarines - had proved to be without substance and that no further investigation had taken place. He added, however, that some claims were substantiated and action had been taken against people - including high ranking officials involved in the overall process - who were found to have received various gifts from bidders.

According to economists, the price of the arms deal has risen to an estimated RSA 80 billion (US $8 billion) over the past two years. The deal was originally set to cost about RSA 45 billion over 12 years, with an expectation that offset agreements for development projects would take place in South Africa. But opposition groups and non-governmental organisations have long argued that the money spent on the weapons should have gone towards poverty reduction programmes.

Commenting on the report, analysts told IRIN that the focus now had to be on the way in which parliament handled the findings and the recommendations. "What we saw today was very much an informal process as MPs were only briefed on the report. The real process starts now as the report is referred to the various parliamentary committees and their study of the document," one analyst said. "The key committee is going to be I think the public accounts committee which has in recent months become divided over the probe. The key concern I would say is accountability and follow through."

Critics have slammed the allegedly "secretive" nature of the government's investigation. "There have been some concerns about the process but we should not simply dismiss the finding and recommendations based on this. The report has been released and South Africa has to now deal with it," the analyst added.

Concerns about corruption and illegularities first surfaced in September 1999 when opposition Pan African Congress (PAC) MP Patricia de Lille raised questions in parliament. In November 1999 De Lille handed over information to Judge Willem Heath who at the time was charged with investigating corruption within government structures. Despite the allegations, Defence Minister Mosuiua Lekota signed the arms deal a month later.

In November 2000, parliament's public accounts committee called for a multi-agency investigation into the deal. They called for Heath to be involved. In January this year, President Thabo Mbeki excluded Heath from the investigating team. In August, African National Congress (ANC) MP Andrew Feinstein resigned citing the ruling party's handling of the arms deal as his reason. Feinstein had been a senior member of the public accounts committee but was demoted when the ANC reshuffled its member on the committee and demoted Feinstein.

Ngcuka said that there was "serious concern" with regards to conflict of interest by government officials and there "seems to be indications that certain officials had found themselves in incompatible positions, which might have led to the perception that the credibility of the acquisition process has been compromised in specific instances".

"These instances form some of the basis of the allegations that we are pursuing. We will be taking action within the next 24 hours," he added.

Among the recommendations made in the report was that parliament take "urgent steps to ensure that high ranking officials and office bearers such as ministers and deputy ministers, are not allowed to be involved, whether personally or as part of private enterprise, for a reasonable period of time after they leave public office, in contracts that are concluded with the state".

It also recommended that personnel be trained to understand procurement policies and that "good procurement" practices were adhered to.

Speaking on behalf of the government at a press conference after the briefing, Lekota said the government accepted the findings of the investigation "without reservation" and that it would take "all necessary steps to implement their (the three investigative departments) recommendations.

"Government will continue with the acquisition process, which, we are convinced, is in the interest of the country," Lekota told journalists. "In the light of the damage to our country, caused by unfounded allegations of mass corruption in the part of government and reputable international companies, government will institute its own investigations to ascertain the sources of these allegations and the purpose they sought to achieve."

For the full report please go to
http://www.parliament.gov.za/committees/SDP/index.asp