On 19 March 2014, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela delivered her report on her investigation into the security upgrades to the private residence of President Jacob Zuma. According to her report, President Zuma and his family benefitted unduly from non-security upgrades, disguised under the blanket of security.
The ANC has warned the ANCYL and COSAS not to attack the PP, but rather to interrogate the report. And in this, I would try to debunk some of the findings of the report, without trying to cast any doubt on the incumbent.
When the initial report was leaked to the media earlier this year, the PP said she did not know who to give the report to. She wanted to give it to the Minister of Public Works, but decided against it, as the Minister is still under the direction of the President. And since this report is about the private residence of the President, she felt it inappropriate to submit the report to a subordinate of the President.
Section 181 (5) of the Constitution is extremely clear that Chapter 9 Institutions, including the Public Protector, has to account to Parliament. Besides the Constitution, the office of the PP also functions under an Act of Parliament. And since the National Assembly (one of the two Houses of Parliament) is responsible for the election and possible dismissal of the President; one would think the NA the most appropriate forum for submission of such a report. It still boggles my mind that the PP would decide to hold a press conference to announce her findings on a matter of such national importance.
Secondly, the PP makes a couple of very unfair judgment calls on security matters; something she clearly knows very little of. The report also shows how she is not aware of the way things are at the Department of Public Works, and what Minister Thulas Nxesi is doing to correct these deficiencies. But nowhere in the report does the PP state the correct structure for the security of the President. She's awfully quiet on the coordinating role of the Department of Defence, for instance.
One of the biggest problems with the Nkandla project has to do with verification and quantification of tenders. This is something that Minister Nxesi countless times spoke of as a major issue in Public Works. Although scope change and cost escalation is a normal occurrence in construction projects, this becomes a huge headache in Public Works, as it becomes criminal in nature.
It is used as a tool to defraud the State of millions, if not billions, and has gone unchecked in Public Works for many years. It has only been recently, when Thulas Nxesi became the Minister, that this was identified as one of the main issues for the fight against fraud and corruption at Public Works. Already, officials found to have colluded with private companies and individuals, had been brought to book. And the process continues.
What the PP should have questioned firstly, should have been the disproportionate escalation of costs. If her office did a good job, they would have known that this question had been raised by Minister Nxesi, and that a process had started to look into this, with the aim of obtaining charges against individuals who allowed this knowingly.
One of the issues raised by the PP, which I agree wholeheartedly with, is the flawed process followed. Or rather, the fact that the process was flaunted, and a haphazard, staggered process preferred. It was almost like, let's deal with issues as they occur, instead of a clear plan.
The National Key Point Act (47 of 1985), Section 3B makes provision for the establishment of a Special Account for the Safeguarding of National Key Points. This is where funds should have came from for the construction, renovations and maintenance of key points. But because this Account is non-existent, Public Works; the department responsible for government property, had to use funds allocated for other functions (Dolomite Risk Management and Inner City Regeneration) to complete the upgrades at Nkandla.
This is something that happens regularly at Public Works, where the department has to pay for various property related services on behalf of other departments. These departments budget for such services, but only pay Public Works after the fact. This means that Public Works have to use monies allocated for other functions, and only receive repayments later, sometimes after the closing of the relevant financial year. In this instance, Public Works used its own money to fund a project which is primarily on behalf of the Department of Defence.
As the Inter-Ministerial report indicated, most of the money was spent on construction on land belonging to the State, rather than on KwaNxamalala, the home of the President. But apparently, the PP was not too interested in this fact. Whatever monies was spent on KwaNxamalala itself, would not have been at the behest of the President. For instance, the houses the President built with his own money, already had normal windows in. But security wanted bullet proof windows. That meant that some walls had to be reinforced to hold those windows. If the President has already paid for windows, why should he bear the cost of what security (i.e. the State) is insisting on?
The PP mentions that the President and his family benefitted unduly from "non-security" upgrades, citing the "swimming" pool, visitor's centre, the culvert, the cattle kraal, the chicken coop and the spaza shop. Well, I need someone to explain to me how one can benefit from something that was already there! MaKhumalo had been running that spaza shop since the President was incarcerated on Robben Island. And despite being the country's first lady, she continue rendering that service to the local community.
Now security is saying that the location of the shop and it has to be moved. The same with the kraal, the coop and the culvert. Again, why should the President pay for something that is not a priority to him? He and the family was quite happy with the location of the aforementioned, why should they fork out monies to have it moved? The State wants it moved, the State has to foot the bill. And by the way, the State gave MaKhumalo a much smaller spaza shop than what she had before.
As for the "swimming" pool, I want the PP to take the dimensions of the pool and compare it to any other normal swimming pool. She'll be highly surprised. That pool is there to provide water for an emergency like a fire. She would also notice that it is quite accessible to aerial firefighting operations, a bambi bucket can very easily be dropped to scoop out water, if there's a fire in the surrounding areas.
The visitor's centre. Unlike what some people think, the President gets very little rest when he is home at KwaNxamalala. That is because he is running an advice office from home. As soon as he arrives home, people of Nkandla start queueing to seek his counsel. Again, security found this to be a problem, as people enter the main buildings without prior screening. And they insisted that some building be constructed where visitors (i.e. community) could be seated, whilst being screened at the same time, before going to see the First Citizen of the country. Maybe here could have been some influence, but justifiably so; as one would like to see extra buildings blending in with the aesthetics of the surroundings.
One thing the PP also mentions, is the fact that the President should have questioned the escalating costs. I am asking, why? Was the President aware of the initial costs? Was he informed of any rise in costs? Was he told why the costs have risen? I think not. And whilst he might have been privy to the plans afoot, why should he question it when he sees it being done? If he's, for instance, informed that a wall needs to be knocked down and rebuild, why should he question anything, when he sees the job being done?
The only time you would ask a mechanic to perform open heart surgery, is when that specific mechanic happen to be heart surgeon. The PP is an advocate, and I'm sure she's a very good one. But I just feel that she should realise her own limitations, and not be scared to ask for expert advise. Especially if she's handling such sensitive matters. She should have assembled an expert team, consisting of engineers, security experts and fraud specialists.
Instead, her office relied upon the inter-ministerial reports and reports from unspecified sources. And from what I have gathered, not enough input from the President, the person at the eye of this teacup storm. And although she complains about poor response from the ministers involved, nowhere does she mention real details of her "interaction" with the President, so as to solicit proper information from him.
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
