Zuma trying to deflect attention by focusing on ‘apartheid spies’
The presidency on Saturday released a redacted report from a panel appointed by President Cyril Ramaphosa in June last year and headed by Sydney Mufamadi, to look into the malfeasance at the State Security Agency.
The findings reveal, among others issues, that former president Jacob Zuma used the country’s intelligence services for his own political and personal interests – most notably against his successor, Ramaphosa. In his initial response to the report, Zuma tweeted that “I have not been asked any question by this committee. This committee has two well-known apartheid spies. I have never sold out or written letters to the SB [security branch]. I feel nothing when apartheid spies call me corrupt. I hope they are not opening a can of worms that they may regret.”
Other than political grandstanding, the response unfortunately does not even attempt to answer to the findings of the panel. I may not know the two spies referred to in the panel, but is there a price for guessing who Zuma is referring to when he said he has never written letters to the security branch. We have been down this road before. When Bulelani Ngcuka was the National Director of Public Prosecutions at the time that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) preferred arms deal corruption charges against Zuma , it was alleged that Ngcuka was an apartheid spy. A commission of inquiry was instituted and the finding was that the allegations were unfounded and baseless.
If the “two well-known apartheid spies” in the committee committed any crimes during the alleged collaboration, let the police investigate them. If indeed two members of the panel were apartheid spies, does that “fact” delegitimise their findings? Zuma himself knows nothing will come out of the spies’ allegation but the intention is to delegitimise the work of the panel in the eyes of the public and make himself out to be a “victim”. I trust what South Africans are interested in is to find out whether Zuma repurposed the intelligence service to fight his personal battles and enabled his loyalists to loot the agency. South Africans are not interested in finding out who wrote to the security branch more than 40 years go.
The last part of Zuma’s response states: “I hope they are not opening a can of worms that they may regret” is interesting and telling. When Zuma was first charged for arms deal corruption, he promised to spill the beans and we are still waiting. Handing over his executive authority – either out of greed or incompetence – for a family to make executive decisions on his behalf, is the worst form of betrayal of his people. Shadrack Ntimbani Matsotsosela, Giyani