Three arms deal critics express disappointment with commission’s report

21 April 2016 - 18:24 By TMG Digital

Three critics of the government’s arms deal on Thursday expressed disappointment that the Seriti Commission had found that there was no evidence that any of the contracts to procure arms for the defence force were tainted by corruption‚ fraud or irregularities. “We are disappointed‚ but hardly surprised‚ that the Commission has come to these findings‚ which are tantamount to a cover-up‚” said former ANC MP Andrew Feinstein‚ and arms deal critics Paul Holden and Hennie van Vuuren in a joint statement.They said it was clear during the work of the Arms Procurement Commission that it was ill-disposed towards undertaking a full‚ meaningful and unbiased investigation into the arms deal.READ: The full arms deal report“It routinely failed to either admit or interrogate any evidence of wrongdoing in relation to the deal.”The three said they withdrew from the commission in August 2014 in protest at the manner in which it was conducting its investigation.The critics said they had identified a number of problems‚ which indicated that the commission was failing to investigate the arms deal fully and meaningfully.One of those was that the commission refused to admit vital documentary evidence of wrongdoing during the public hearings.“One such document was the Debevoise & Plimpton Report‚ an internal audit of the arms company Ferrostaal‚ which received contracts in the Arms Deal.”The report indicated that arms manufacturer Ferrostaal had made tens of millions of rand in payments to politically connected politicians and procurement officials.No evidence of wrongdoing in #ArmsDeal - ZumaFerrostaal is a company that formed part of the German Submarine Consortium‚ which was awarded a contract to supply the South African Navy with three submarines under the arms deal.“The report also quoted senior Ferrostaal employees as stating that the offset programme was merely a conduit for bribes‚” the three said.In its report‚ the commission stated that the report on Ferrostaal was put in the public domain stealthily without the consent of Ferrostaal. The commission also stated that Ferrostaal had not waived its right of professional privilege. It ruled it inadmissible.The commission came to the conclusion that the report was akin to a stolen document and that the privilege attaching thereto had not been lost.The three also said the commission refused to allow critical witnesses to testify about documents that they had not written‚ or events to which they were not personally witness.“One major consequence of this is that the only people who could testify to corruption in the Arms Deal were those who paid or received bribes.”The three said they intended to provide a detailed response to the report soon.They were also were seeking legal advice as to the legality of the commission’s conduct and the viability of a legal review to have the report set aside...

There’s never been a more important time to support independent media.

From World War 1 to present-day cosmopolitan South Africa and beyond, the Sunday Times has been a pillar in covering the stories that matter to you.

For just R80 you can become a premium member (digital access) and support a publication that has played an important political and social role in South Africa for over a century of Sundays. You can cancel anytime.

Already subscribed? Sign in below.



Questions or problems? Email helpdesk@timeslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00.