Lawyer challenges judge to take a lie detector test to determine whose telling truth over arms deal inquiry
The Chairperson - (W. L. Seriti JA)
Arms Deal Commission
MN MOABI / RESIGNATION FROM THE AMRS DEAL COMMISSION
I intend to deal briefly with your response to my resignation and to also engage the Evidence Leaders on their Memorandum of 22nd January 2013.
First let me deal with the Memorandum by the Evidence Leaders.
TO THE EVIDENCE LEADERS
1) I have not in my resignation letter indicated any doubt about your professionalism and independence to execute your duties as per the briefs from the Commission.
2) I have also not alluded to any conduct by yourself that brings your credibility into question.
However given your Memorandum on these issues, I am persuaded to engage with you on the following:-
Ad Paragraph 5 of the Memorandum
I have no knowledge and or recollection about you being "actively and consistently encouraged to make contributions on how best the Commission should achieve its mandate"
Where and when did this happen and who did the encouragement?
Ad Paragraph 10
I have no knowledge and or recollection about the "consultations and strategic planning sessions that the Commission held" with you.
Where; when and with whom were these consultations and strategic planning sessions held?
I am of the view that you have shown an interest in the successful conclusion of the Commission's mandate and this is naturally to be expected since you are on brief.
However; I issue out a challenge to you to defend your views/comments referred to above in the following manner:-
I am prepared to publicly say that I did not; as a Senior Investigator in the Commission participate in any of the instances you refer to above.
I am prepared to undergo public scrutiny under a LIE DETECTOR TEST to proof my position.
If you are prepared to equally do the same, then South Africa at large will have reason to understand where your confidence in the Chairperson of the Commission is coming from.
Your past relationships with the Chairperson if any; prior to the institution of the Commission and your dealings with the Commission lately will be a good base to explore where you are coming from on your stance.
TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE ARMS DEAL COMMISSION
I have indicated that I will be brief in my response; which is as follows:-
a) I stand by my resignation letter and reasons put forward therein.
b) I did not level serious accusations against the Commission in my resignation letter but against the Chairperson of the Commission
c) Everything in your response that is contrary to the specific points I raised in my letter of resignation I dispute.
Other matters you refer to are for now insignificant and can be dealt with later, if necessary.
Again like I have challenged the Evidence Leaders to submit themselves for public scrutiny by the South Africans through undergoing a LIE DETECTOR TEST;
together with myself on my statements; the Chairperson is similarly invited. I will be the first to take the LIE DETECTOR TESTif you oblige.
You have extensively referred to Adv Mdumbe in your response. I equally extend my challenge to him to disclose to the public under a LIE DETECTOR TEST how much work and consultations he did alone or with yourself to the exclusion of others on the 2nd agenda. I have no grudge against anyone.
Public scrutiny in the proposed manner will in my view resolve the veracity of the allegations and counter-allegations already in existence.
TheLIGHT has shone on the 2nd agenda and it is wobbly.