Does Roda make his case or ‘is he drinking the NLC’s Kool-Aid’?

ON AUGUST 18, Morris Roda (of the Miriam Makeba tribute and SABC Thank You concert infamy) wrote: “My understanding is that the list was being disclosed to Parliament for oversight purposes only. Even before the portfolio committee could examine the list, the DA opportunistically, if not maliciously leaked the list, probably for cheap political point-scoring.”

This reference was to the National Lotteries Commission’s (NLC’s) 201718, 2018-19 and Covid-19 relief fund list of grant beneficiaries which the DA fought for several months to be released. Is it possible that Roda does make his case or is he drinking the NLC’s Kool-Aid? These lists were only released after sustained pressure on the NLC by the DA which included obtaining a legal opinion on the matter and laying criminal charges against the NLC’s board and commissioner. The reason we had opted for this course of action was because of the many damning media reports into corrupt activities linked the NLC’s hierarchy as well as their decision to withhold these lists from the public and Parliament for the first time in 18 years, a criminal offence.

Parliament’s chief legal adviser, advocate Z Adhikarie, in her legal opinion, stated: “As to whether the assertion by the NLC that previous publications of lists of beneficiaries had been done erroneously, is correct, we submit that the assertion is incorrect and would not in our view withstand constitutional scrutiny,” and, “…The NLC must clearly and precisely specify the grounds and the reasons for refusal of the information.”

In response, the NLC tried its best to invoke rule 189 of the Parliamentary standing orders which would only allow for the release of the lists subject to various confidentiality and embargo provisions.

However, our own legal opinion found: “…No part of section 60 specifically empowers the minister to impose expansive secrecy obligations over all beneficiary information.”

This assertion was agreed to by Adhikarie’s office at the portfolio committee meeting on July 14. Therefore, Roda’s spurious claim that we leaked these lists “willy-nilly” was false and our attachment of the beneficiary lists to a media statement on July 28, entitled “DA to study lists of NLC grant beneficiaries”, was perfectly within the confines of the law and parliamentary convention.

But Roda went on to argue that the DA should have waited for the outcome of the ongoing court case involving United Civil Society in Action (Ucsa) against GroundUp and the application by Media Monitoring Africa and SA National Editors’ Forum to have Regulation 8 of the regulations relating to distribution agencies declared unconstitutional. Does he not know that prior to Ucsa withdrawing their case and being ordered to pay costs, that the parliamentary process was well under way?

While we have no intention of pre-empting the court’s decision, if Parliament, the DA and Sanef/MMA’s legal opinions are congruent in the sense that they believe that Regulation8 is ultra vires, the Lotteries Act and regulations are constitutionally invalid, I would argue there is a substantive case to be heard. Roda would do well to rather focus on ensuring the public knows how their tax money is spent.

“The reason we opted for this course was the damning media reports into corrupt activities linked to the NLC