There is a way to shake the 'thief' tag, Mr Zuma

22 March 2015 - 02:00 By Bruce Whitfield
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now
Bruce Whitfield
Bruce Whitfield
Image: Business Times

Dear Mr President. Forgive this format of an open letter. We have met and chatted a couple of times on public podiums, but I would not for a moment presume that a personal note from me would penetrate the multiple layers of the Presidency.

I hope this finds you well.

I write because I think I may have a solution to the seemingly intractable problem of Nkandla.

While our law and venerable constitution provide us all with the right to be assumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law, your role as head of state is being undermined by the consistent allegations that are thrown up against you.

You are being called a liar and a thief. If it was me, I would sue. I would go to court to defend my reputation, as is my right to do. Court actions, though, are costly and it would be a pity to give your critics additional ammunition to use against you if you used public money to defend your personal reputation.

And even if, as a CNN investigation recently found, you are the fifth-best remunerated leader in the world on R2.7-million a year, it would be costly to fight it out using your own resources.

I am certain you find the idea of using public money for your own benefit as repugnant as opposition parties in parliament do.

Here is what I propose.

You said in parliament earlier this month that there was no obligation upon you to pay back the amount of money as determined by the office of the public protector. You said you would not "pay back the money until a determination by the appointed people has been made".

You have asked the police minister to investigate, and that is commendable. But you know that the wheels of state grind slowly. I have seen your personal frustration, for example, at the fact that small businesses are severely impacted by the failure of the state to pay its bills on time. You know the legal bureaucracy is overburdened and probably under-resourced.

You also know better than most the perils of challenging the boss. Thabo Mbeki sacked you as his deputy. He said it was for corruption, again never proved in a court of law.

You know how it feels to challenge the authority of the president and lose. It places an extraordinary burden on officials appointed by the state to investigate the head of state. Is it really fair on them to expect them to investigate you?

In an ideal world it would happen quickly, and South Africa would get a credible answer. But you know how it is. Some officials would think they were doing you a favour and actually undermine you. I am certain you were furious at the use of your name to secure landing rights for the Gupta wedding party at Waterkloof, for example.

What if the South African Revenue Service found that there was a fringe benefits tax liability on the improvements to your personal residence? How awkward a conversation would that be for the newly appointed SARS commissioner, Tom Moyane, presently busy with the restructuring of the engine room of South Africa's revenue collection?

Frankly, sir, our public officials have enough to worry about without being concerned about watching their backs.

There is a solution. Companies concerned about fraud in their ranks have increasingly outsourced the investigative function to one of the many forensic units housed in the country's booming legal and accounting firms.

They really are very good at what they do. Their findings are used in courts of law to secure convictions, but mostly the evidence, when presented to individuals, leads to speedy and highly effective plea-bargain agreements.

Those found innocent of wrongdoing are also quickly exonerated, able to continue their lives with their reputations intact.

I know what you are thinking. We could not possibly use taxpayers' money to clear your name. Your political critics would have a field day.

This is where the marvels of 21st-century technology could be put to use: crowdfunding. It's increasingly being used by people from all walks of life who are seeking funds for a project. We could ask South Africans to donate money voluntarily and so place no undue burden on the fiscus.

That money could be used to pay for a credible, independent investigation by one of the big accounting firms.

In the unlikely event it found there was a financial liability, you could either enter into a discussion with it and settle the amount or go to court to prove your innocence.

Should you be cleared by an independent investigation of wrongdoing then, sir, there could be no doubt about your suitability to lead our great country.

You must be tired of being called a liar and a thief. The motions of no confidence that have been brought against you in parliament serve as a considerable distraction from the real work that needs to be done.

You are accused of stealing from the poor, breaking parliament and undermining the credibility of your high office. You cannot allow this to continue unchallenged.

Why should you have to stand in parliament like a thief in the dock facing raft after raft of allegations against you? What better way to undermine the arguments than with the facts?

This, sir, I believe is a win-win. South Africans get clarity on whether you should pay back any money and whether there is a tax liability, and once we have cleared the air you can get back to the important business of running the country.

Sincerely

Bruce

Whitfield is an award-winning financial broadcaster and writer

subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now