THE Nkandla issue continues to fester like a sore for both the country and the governing African National Congress (ANC). However, instead of the infection being excised, it has just been dabbed and continues to ooze.
The much-awaited Special Investigating Unit (SIU) report was finally released last week, the third such report after the initial probe by an interministerial task team headed by Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi, and the more recent report by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela.
Unsurprisingly, the SIU report seeks to exonerate President Jacob Zuma for the significant cost overruns at his Nkandla homestead, perhaps because it is the president who after all signed the proclamation for the probe to go ahead.
The question that needs to be asked is whether there was any hope in ANC and government circles that the SIU report, given its limited mandate of looking at criminal, civil and disciplinary steps against officials, would help excise the pus?
And it seems after more than two years of the ANC and the security cluster ministers changing band aid after band aid, this has paid off. It appears that the much desired political healing is the SIU finding that Mr Zuma and his family benefited, but only blaming the president’s private architect Minenhle Makhanya and three former directors-general — none of whom still work for the government.
Ironically, both the SIU and public protector agree on one fundamental point: that the rot in government goes deep, across departments, and that many officials either don’t understand their jobs or fail to execute their responsibilities.
For the ANC, Nkandla has proved to be a real pain in the butt. The party continues to face questions in Parliament and from the general public. Yet the fundamental question on the issue that has not been answered by anybody is: Why must the taxpayer pay between R216m and R246m to secure Mr Zuma’s private residence?
Ms Madonsela pointed out in her findings that structures such as the clinic, the "fire pool", and amphitheatre were constructed at state expense and that there was no indication they would revert to state ownership.
The SIU is outcomes driven. If it finds that monies have to be recovered the unit has to lay charges; in other words blame someone, and then recover as much of those monies as possible. Unfortunately, it has not set its sights on the main beneficiary.
Significantly, however, the SIU did also raise concern over certain facts that emerged from its investigation. This included that very early in the upgrade process, Mr Zuma had introduced his private professional team — dealing with his own upgrades — to officials at the Department of Public Works. Soon thereafter former Public Works Minister Geoff Doidge "urged" that the two processes — Mr Zuma’s private renovations and the state security upgrades — be "co-ordinated".
According to the report: " The direct involvement of these persons was used by officials as a means to support or push through what they themselves wanted. In fact, there appeared to be a disturbing tendency to invoke the name of the president to move the project along …"
Mr Makhanya is now facing charges and the SIU wants him to cough up R155m. The SIU report states that Public Works officials effectively surrendered their duties and responsibilities to him and therefore lost control of the entire project. This smacks of "undue influence", the very same issue that led to the unlawful use of Waterkloof Air Force Base in February last year — an issue for which no one has taken political accountability.
- BDLive
No comments:
Post a Comment