Читать книгу Tafelberg Short: Nkandla - The end of Zuma? - City Press - Страница 7

The demise of President Thabo Mbeki was sealed at the 2008 NEC meeting of the ANC, where Jacob Zuma was elected as president of the ANC. In May 2009, he was inaugurated as president of South Africa.

There were no wild parties at Nkandla on that day. No slaughtering of beasts or feasting. By mid-morning most of the local roads and pathways were deserted as villagers filed into the local Lindela Thusong Multipurpose Centre, where a big screen was erected by the Government Communication and Information Services. Big screens were also erected at the nearby towns of Eshowe, Tongaat and four smaller screens at Zuma’s home.

Locals at the multipurpose centre – mostly elderly and middle-aged women – attributed the lack of festivities to the absence of village youths, most of whom had been bussed to Pretoria on Thursday and Friday to be part of the 30 000 strong crowd that watched the inauguration from the southern lawns of the Union Buildings.

On screen, as Zuma walked onto the podium hand-in-hand with his first wife, Sizakele (MaKhumalo), elderly women ululated and a handful of young men broke into song.

“Zuma was destined to lead from his childhood. He has gone through so much hardship for us,” said Bonginkosi Khanyile.

Said Buhle Shangase: “We hope this is the beginning of the end of poverty and underdevelopment for us.”

She added: “With Zuma becoming the president we hope this area will finally become the centre of attraction.”

A couple of weeks later, it did.

In early June, the rolling hills of KwaNxamalala came alive as thousands of people descended on the impoverished village to celebrate President Zuma’s ascendancy to power.

A crowd of between 10 000 and 20 000 descended on the remote rural village to dance to rhythms of maskandi and gospel music in what was termed the mother of all parties. Some villagers walked more than 10km to Tolwana Primary School where the party was held.

Most of the speakers thanked Zuma for his resilience, saying his ascendancy to the presidency was a true testimony that he was a man of the people. Zuma told the crowd that he would never forget the people of Nkandla. He said as an uneducated man he need not be ashamed of himself and urged the youth to aim high in life.

“This is a rural area which many people never thought could produce a president of such an old organisation as the ANC. They never thought they could produce a president of the republic. I am grateful to you all and I still belong here. I am proud of my roots.”

However, in spite of the festivities and some subsequent and very pricey developments in the area, for normal residents not much changed. In September of 2009, Malibongwe Mhlongo of Nkandla wrote the following letter to City Press:

As a rural, ordinary citizen of Nkandla, I still smell freedom approaching from a mile away but it always fails to arrive.

We cannot claim parity while we as rural people are still subjected to poor health facilities and a scarcity of doctors.

I wonder how many people have died because of poor service in rural communities.

In our area, Nkungumathe, the health department provided what it calls a health post. There’s no ­activity in this place, except the nurse who comes to clean the building every day in order to register her name on the payroll.

Patients still have to spend R50 on transport to Nkandla Hospital to collect pills and get check-ups.

Rural people need access to a health service that is professional and user-friendly like any other ­citizen in South Africa. If this and any other social ills besetting the lives of rural people could be attended to we would enjoy freedom.

We are hopeful that the government will soon pay attention to the need of the rural communities.

In 2009, with the Zuma regime barely eight months into power, the Presidency confirmed in a statement that R65 million would be splurged on his Nkandla home, the bulk of which would be paid for by the taxpayer. New features would include a helicopter pad, military clinic and police station and security staff quarters. It, however, claimed Zuma would foot the costs of extending the palatial Nkandla residence, which already stood out like a sore thumb in the poor, rural neighbourhood.

It seems that where Zuma is concerned, there are three things which should preclude each other, but yet run parallel and seem to have little impact on each other. They are:

•The undying support of those who view him as a champion of the poor;

•the large-scale upgrading of the presidential compound and niggling questions around financial and moral corruption; and

•the endemic poverty of regular people in Nkandla (and other rural areas of South Africa).

He courted controversy in 2010 when he did not declare his assets timeously. His lawyer Michael Hulley later said Zuma “does not hold any directorship, membership or shareholding in any company, either public or private”. He subsequently submitted a list of gifts, benefits and financial interests held or received.

By the end of 2010, President Zuma was trying his best to stomp on the growing controversy about the enrichment of the first family, but was failing.

While Young Communist League (YCL) chairperson David Masondo was smacked down for public criticism, his shorthand definition of first family empowerment as ZEE (Zuma Economic Empowerment) rather than BEE quickly worked its way into the national alphabet soup.

The controversy around Nkandla did not happen in a vacuum, nor has it been President Zuma’s only crisis.

On Thursday, 16 August 2012 there was a wildcat strike at a mine owned by Lonmin in the Marikana area. The event garnered international attention following a series of violent incidents between the South African Police Service, Lonmin security, the leadership of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) and strikers, which resulted in the deaths of 44 people, the majority of whom were striking mineworkers. At least 78 additional workers were injured. In the preceding week, 10 people, including two policemen and two security guards, were killed.

It was Zuma’s 9/11 moment. In response he ordered the Marikana Commission, headed by Ian Farlam, to investigate the incident.

Then, in May 2013 members of a wealthy and politically connected Indian family, the Guptas, landed their privately chartered aircraft carrying 200 people on a restricted military air base while en route to a family wedding.

The Gupta family had been repeatedly implicated in the bankrolling of Zuma family projects and their companies had employed two of Zuma’s children in high profile roles.

Neither of these incidents is under discussion here, but “Guptagate” does speak to and echo “Nkandlagate” in many ways. It was the emergence of “number 1”.

Diplomatic protocol chief Bruce Koloane said he acted “under pressure from number 1”, a direct reference to Zuma. Koloane was suspended; a government report said he used deception to obtain military landing permission.

Writing in City Press, Njabulo Ndebele said:

Like theoretical physicists, we can determine the nature and location of “Number 1” from the gravitational pull that reveals its presence. Its incorporeal presence is there in the entire Waterkloof Air Force base incident, but frustratingly invisible.

Not only is “Number 1” a known unknown entity, it is also unnamable. When Ambassador Koloane refers to “Number 1” as a source of instructions, he expresses his fear of naming him.

“Number 1”, through the practice of leaving no paper trail behind its actions, breeds conspiratorial illusions among those caught in carrying out its instructions. By leaving no trail of evidence, yet compulsively achieving its goals, it is a force that makes those acting on its behalf believe in the illusion that a phenomenon such as Nkandla, which is obvious to the human eye, can be rendered invisible through a device of law.

The watershed moment for Zuma regarding Nkandla, came in September 2012, when City Press received an anonymous email with proof that the state did not only pay for security upgrades when it spent R250 million on President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla compound.

The proof came in the form of correspondence by consecutive former Public Works ministers Geoff Doidge and Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, and senior Public Works officials. It laid bare the frantic rush with which the project was pushed through – and that Zuma was kept abreast of the extent of the upgrades.

A flurry of activity was triggered by a progress report prepared by the Durban office of Public Works for “Prestige Project A” – the name of the Nkandla upgrade – on 8 September 2010. Public Works’ call for “high-level intervention” resulted in Doidge attending an emergency progress meeting at Nkandla on 23 September 2010 where Doidge “pointed out that unnecessary delays are not acceptable”.

Seventeen days later, Public Works reported on the progress of the upgrades. Work was still outstanding on fencing, the helipad, the building of a guardhouse, the relocation of two families, and the construction of tunnels and safe havens. At the end of that month, Zuma fired Doidge and appointed Mahlangu-Nkabinde in his place.

Toward the end of 2012, City Press received documentation proving that the Public Works department had approved a R203 million budget in March 2011 for Prestige Project A.

According to official departmental documentation, the scope of the work was divided as follows:

•The “public (state’s) portion: R203 079 677.18”; and

•The “private (owner’s) portion: R10 651 580.64”.

It stated that the department had already spent R205 000 on electrical cabling and lightning protectors – something that Zuma was supposed to fund.

“Please note that the implementation of some of these issues was unavoidable and some had already been completed.” The rest of the work – including extensive landscaping of Zuma’s residential compound – fell “outside the scope of security measures”.

In the documentation, “written instruction” from “top ­management” was requested to proceed with work the state was not supposed to fund. There is a suggestion that it be discussed this with Zuma, referred to as the “principal”, because the “financial implication directly affects him”.

After the publication of this documentation, Presidency spokesperson Zanele Mngadi referred City Press to Public Works for comment. However, the department’s acting director-general, Mandisa Fatyela-Lindie, declined to comment on the amount that was spent.

“The Nkandla presidential residence, like all other presidential residences in South Africa, is a national key point. As such, information related to the national key point is protected in terms of the National Key Point Act,” was all she said.

Presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj confirmed that Nkandla and nine other residences of current and former presidents had been declared national key points in April 2010.

The starting point for any legal evaluation of this alleged splurge of public funds to improve the private residence of our president must be the Executive Members Ethics Act and the code adopted to give effect to it, which binds all Cabinet members, including the president. The act and the code prohibit the president from acting in a way that is inconsistent with his office, using his position to enrich himself, or acting in a way that may compromise the credibility or integrity of his office or of the government. The code further prohibits the president from making improper use of any allowance or payment properly made to him, or to disregard the administrative rules that apply to him.

It is clear the spending of approximately R250 million on an upgrade to the private home of the president would be in clear breach of these obligations and would therefore be unlawful. No wonder government tried to hide details about the unlawful expenditure by invoking a piece of draconian apartheid legislation on national key points.

However, in a constitutional democracy, legislation can never be used to hide unlawful conduct, maladministration or corruption; and neither can it be used to try and escape from accountability for the spending of public funds.

In response to the City Press expose, Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi called for an investigation into how City Press had obtained the documentation.

Nxesi defended the expenditure, but refused to confirm the amount of taxpayers’ money spent on the project. However, he slammed City Press for publishing details from “top secret” documentation.

“The merely unlawful possession of a top secret (document) is a breach of the laws … This therefore calls for an investigation to be launched to determine how the City Press illegally ended up in possession of this document,” Nxesi said.

There was an overwhelming response from South Africans, much of it criticising Nxesi’s response and some of it in support of Nxesi. Here are some Twitter responses:

•Instead of answering the questions about the Nkandla R200m and giving facts, ANC decides to investigate how City Press got the info. Lovely.– Siyabonga Nyezi

•Public Works Minister Nxesi to investigate how City Press learned of Nkandla upgrade. Perhaps should investigate why it was kept secret! – Etienne Shardlow

•Me thinks this ‘ministerial handbook’ needs to be updated and upgraded too, to 2012 requirements! It shouldn’t cost that much. #nkandlagate– Paul A Harris

•Whether Nxesi launches an investigation or not against City Press, he still to needs explain Nkandlagate! What the hell?! – Nompumelelo Kunene

•@City_Press Charity starts at Nkandla. – Siegfried Hannig

•It’s amazing how Thulas Nxesi didn’t deny the story in City Press about 203 million upgrade on Zuma’s home – Mawethu Sunduza

•Damn all these howlers . . . I’d love to be involved in the development of Nkandla!! Bring on #ruraldevelopment – Sam Mhlungu

•Interesting that City Press didn’t compare JZ Nkandla spend to Mbeki, de Klerk and Mandela. possibly deliberate. #OneSidedReporting (sic) – Thami Cele

•Yes, I think City Press should b investigated n nt Zuma, so wat if he want to do sum chnges @Inkandla ... (sic) – zanele

•Give it up @ferialhaffajee!! Your campaign has failed thus far. No sign of it ever winning @City_Press on Sunday: R200m bill for Nkandla (sic) – Luthando

•@City_Press Zuma is not Nkandla development will happen with or without u writing negative things about it if it was CPT u will silent!!! (sic) – Sabelo Zulu

•City Press is at it again, trying desperately to discredit Zuma. We know they oppose Zuma and by implication ANC, they R200m story is insane! (sic) – lindani

•Officials who gave City Press those unclassified documents are part of the anti-Zuma brigade. Thulas Nxesi can go ahead and launch the probe. – Jobe S Sithole

•@chestermissing City Press is lying. Discrediting Zuma is part of their plan. Who’d revamp a house for R200m? Do people know how much dis is (sic) – sandile gasa

Whether taxpayers believed that their money had and was being spent on the president’s home or that the story was fabricated to discredit him, they agreed that such an amount was preposterous – how could such extravagence happen in a country like South Africa?

And yet it seemed the upgrades to Nkandla were happening, this despite massive upgrades to Zuma’s official residences in Pretoria, Durban and Cape Town, undertaken since 2009. The fact that the cost of living had gone up significantly and that our president married four women – which brought extra costs to taxpayers – should also not be ignored.

Aside from the day-to-day costs, the Zuma family celebrations seemed disproportionately lavish. When Duduzile got engaged in December 2010, preparations included the removal of the heavy machinery being used for the construction of the helipad.

Then, April 2012 was a month of celebrations in the Zuma household – third wife Thobeka Madiba-Zuma celebrated her 40th birthday at a lavish bash and Zuma himself cut cakes almost daily at four events arranged for his 70th birthday celebrations. A massive marquee had been erected for Zuma’s birthday party and cattle were slaughtered overnight to feed both the guests and the community. The N2 freeway from Durban and the road leading to Zuma’s homes were dotted with posters directing guests to the party.

A week later, the president married Bongi Ngema in a private traditional ceremony at Nkandla, with the local community at Nxamalala joining in the celebration.

In an unfortunate juxtaposition for Zuma, it was revealed toward the end of 2012 that his Malawian colleague, President Joyce Banda, has taken a personal salary cut of 30%. Her humility and no-frills style inspired us all, but not Zuma.

The security upgrades at Nkandla were also in contrast with the private residences of former presidents FW de Klerk, Mandela and Mbeki have been far more modest than those at Zuma’s Nkandla homestead.

Former president FW de Klerk’s spokesperson, Dave Steward, said the state had dealt with security facilities at his home in Pretoria and his holiday home in Hermanus. “The budget was relatively modest. There have been no enhancements to his private living quarters. “Security continues to be provided by the state, which conducts assessments of the security situation around him.”

There was a R28.2 million upgrade to former president Nelson Mandela’s Qunu residence. During his time in office, no upgrades were done at his private houses, except for security. “But it was never close to R200 million. It was just the basics: electric fencing, automatic gates and a guard house,” said a source with knowledge of Mandela’s term in office. As president, Mandela mostly stayed at his Houghton home, his house in Qunu was built with his own money.

Former president Thabo Mbeki lives with his wife, Zanele, in their house in Houghton, Joburg. Mbeki’s home has state-funded office space and a guard house for his security detail. Mbeki is also accompanied on the road by protectors from the police’s VIP protection unit. In September 2006, former public works minister Thoko Didiza confirmed that her department paid R3.5 million for security upgrades at Mbeki’s house.

About Nkandla, a Public Works insider said it was common for projects in the department’s “prestige portfolio”, of which Nkandla is one, not to go out on tender. The department had a list of approved service providers from which it chose companies to do the work.

At the time of the exposé, construction experts questioned the cost of the controversial upgrades, with some describing the costs as a “joke” and many saying they seem to have been grossly inflated. City Press spoke to experts in the construction industry who agreed to speak to City Press without access to detailed information about the extent of the renovations.

Stuart Clark, a contracts manager at Reed Simpson Construction, said that after taking a look at published pictures of the residence, the expenditure seemed “grossly overestimated”.

“The further away the construction site is, the higher the price of construction, with everything having to be hauled in from far away. But looking at the pictures (of the residence), everything seems overpriced,” said Clark.

Hermanus van Niekerk, owner of Security Experts, said the price tag for security equipment and fencing at Zuma’s private residence was a “joke”, adding it was “impossible to think security installations can cost that much”.

Van Niekerk, with more than 20 years of managerial and technical experience in the security industry, said “security for one residence should not cost that much money. It seems someone, somewhere is inflating the prices.” The money paid to Minenhle Makhanya Architects also seems inflated, said an industry architect.

Most of the 15 contractors who worked on the project declined to comment, citing confidentiality clauses.

When City Press put it to Thandeka Nene of Bonelena that her company in fact scored almost R100 million from the project, Nene, who has a penchant for German sedans and luxury holidays, said the figures were “not correct” and that she could not speak to us “because (she) signed confidentiality agreements”.

The Mail & Guardian reported that Bonelena employed Zuma’s niece, Khulubuse Zuma’s sister, as a manager on the project. Nene said there was no Zuma in her company, but that she was “too far” from the work at Nkandla to know which people the company employed on-site. Asked if she investigated whether Zuma’s niece worked for Bonelena after the report was published, Nene said she “didn’t have time for that”.

Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, at the end of 2012, an emotional Zuma told Parliament: “I took the decision to expand my home and I built my home with more rondavels, more than once. And I fenced my home. And I engaged the bank and I’m still paying a bond on my first phase of my home.”

However, it became increasingly difficult to deny all the allegations and, after initially setting his aim on whistle-blowers, in December of 2012 Thulas Nxesi changed his tune. He told Kaya FM host John Perlman during an on-air interview: “It is clear in this case that people went over the budget.”

Nxesi also announced that an internal Public Works investigation into Nkandlagate would be concluded in the following week and that its findings would be made public.

Nxesi said the public had the right to be angry about the cost of the Nkandla upgrade but, added the minister, Zuma should be “appreciated” for choosing to live in a rural area “with the poor people”.

This comment points to the fact that (over)spending at Zuma’s residence is part of a larger pattern of spending in the area.