Mbeki phone tapping: DA believes Intelligence Inspector-General has grossly neglected his duty
The Democratic Alliance (DA) believes that the Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence (OIGI) has provided grossly inadequate reasons for dismissing a DA request for an investigation into claims that intelligence agencies illegally tapped the phone of a sitting president.
The Inspector-General has extensive and wide ranging powers to investigate matters of this nature. It is simply not good enough for him to sit on his hands and wait for evidence to be brought to him when he could be proactively investigating the matter.
Indeed, it is the Inspector-General's responsibility, in terms of section 7(7)(cA) of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act of 1994 not only to "receive" complaints but also to "investigate" them. This is why section 7(8)(a) of the same Act gives the Inspector-General "access to any intelligence, information or premises" under the control of any of South Africa's intelligence agencies. It is little wonder that the country has suffered at least three major intelligence scandals of late when the office charged with investigating intelligence scandals neglects its own legislative obligations.
The DA will now write again to the Inspector-General, particularly over his claim that "no evidence of these allegations has been made available". This is flatly refuted by the fact that former-National Director of Public Prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka confirmed to a national newspaper on March 25th that telephone conversations had been "monitored and intercepted" by a state agency.
In addition, the initial newspaper report claimed to have verified the existence of the tapes with "several sources". Several reports have subsequently alleged that the country's ‘intelligence services' are probably responsible for the tapes.
Because of the clandestine nature of the kind of illegal state surveillance operation that is alleged to have taken place, it is quite incredible that the Inspector-General would expect absolutely concrete evidence to be presented to him before launching an investigation. This is never going to be the case when the alleged tapes are being kept under lock and key; and the fact that we have as much information about them as we do attests to some excellent investigative journalism.
The tapping of a phone is illegal under the law - for a phone to be tapped legally, a sitting High Court judge must approve of it. As such, if there is any credible evidence that phone tapping has taken place without the approval of a High Court judge, then that is an illegal invasion of someone's privacy. If all of these newspaper reports, together with the testimony of a former NPA boss are insufficient to invoke an investigation by the Inspector-General's office, then it is questionable how private citizens would be able to get their complaints investigated.
Statement issued by Democratic Alliance chief whip, Ian Davidson MP, March 31 2009
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
