We have detected that the browser you are using is no longer supported. As a result, some content may not display correctly.
We suggest that you upgrade to the latest version of any of the following browsers:
close notification
Stat
ement of the President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, at the
joint sitting of parliament on the release of Jacob Zuma from his
responsibilities as deputy president:
Madame Speaker; Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces;
Honourable Members; Fellow South Africans:
Five days ago we assembled in this Chamber to pay tribute to
Justice Arthur Chaskalson and the new leaders of our judiciary,
Chief Justice Pius Langa and Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang
Moseneke.
I wish to thank Madame Speaker, the Chairperson of the National
Council of Provinces, leaders of all parties in Parliament and
Honourable Members for the opportunity we all had to give
expression to the profound esteem in which we hold our judiciary,
as an important arm of our system of government and a central
pillar of our statehood. I am therefore greatly obliged to our
Presiding Officers and the Honourable Members for giving me this
opportunity to address another joint sitting of the Houses of
Parliament so soon after we met in this form.
It was my view that we should once more assemble in this manner
because of a matter that relates to the common sentiment we all
articulated during the unique and pioneering occasion last
Friday.
As Honourable Members would know, the primary function of the
President of the Republic and the Executive is to regulate the
nation's affairs in a manner that promotes the realisation of the
ideals enshrined in our Constitution. Among others these
include:
- building a society based on democratic values, social justice and
human rights;
- ensuring that government is based on the will of the people and
that every citizen is equally protected by law;
- improving the quality of life of all citizens; and
- building a united and democratic society enjoying its rightful
place among nations of the world.
I believe that the Executive should at all times position itself
diligently to discharge these responsibilities unencumbered by
major distractions and deficiencies that might diminish this
focus.
It was for this reason that during the debate on the vote of the
Presidency, I paid particular attention to the work we are doing to
improve the capacity of government to meet its obligations to the
people.
The Constitution enjoins the President in particular to "uphold,
defend and respect the Constitution as the supreme law of the
Republic; and promote the unity of the nation and that which will
advance the Republic". It further prescribes that all spheres of
government and all organs of state should "respect the
constitutional status, institutions, powers and functions of
government in the other spheres."
Among others, and relevant to the reason I requested this Joint
Sitting, the Executive must discharge its responsibilities within
the context of the rule of law, which includes respect for the
integrity and independence of the judiciary and presumption of
innocence of any person, pending findings of the courts.
Similarly, we also have to respect decisions of our
Parliament.
These obligations are expressly reflected as personal undertakings
and are immanent in the Oath of Office for those taking up
executive positions in government.
They are especially important with regard to the President of the
Republic, who, in terms of our Constitution, is the head of the
National Executive and on whom the executive authority of the
Republic is vested.
Shortly before I left for Chile last week on a state visit, the
Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) announced
that on my return I would study the judgement handed down by the
Hon Mr Justice Squires of the Durban High Court at the end of the
case of The State vs Schabir Shaik and Others, and announce such
decisions as may be necessary arising from this Judgement.
I have since carefully studied the Judgement.
I did this fully to inform myself about Justice Squires' findings,
given the fact that the issue of the relationship between the
Deputy President, the Honourable Jacob Zuma, and the accused had
been canvassed during the trial.
In this regard, I must emphasise that I studied this Judgement not
to make any determination whatsoever about its merits or demerits,
about whether it was wholly or partially right or wrong.
Indeed, such conduct does not fall within our constitutional
mandate as the Executive.
This task belongs to the higher courts, the organs of state that
would hear any appeal that might be lodged.
Accordingly, any actions we may take arising out of Justice
Squires' Judgement would arise merely from the fact that a court
judgement exists, which our Constitution enjoins us to
respect.
As Honourable Members would know, the judgement contains detailed
matters of fact and inference against which penalties have been
meted out.
At the same time, proceedings pertaining to a possible appeal to
higher courts are still pending. However, the Judgement contains
some categorical outcomes.
These are that the court has made findings against the accused and
at the same time pronounced on how these matters relate to our
Deputy President, the Hon Jacob Zuma, raising questions of conduct
that would be inconsistent with expectations that attend those who
hold public office.
In this regard, I would like to emphasise two basic pillars of our
jurisprudence, namely, equality before the law and the right to be
presumed innocent until proven otherwise.
We are of the firm view that this principle applies to the Deputy
President not merely as a matter of principle and common decency,
but also in deference to the individual occupying such office and
the service that he has rendered to the Republic and its people
before and after the attainment of our liberation.
Unambiguous as the judgement may be about an assumed unsavoury
relationship, the Deputy President has yet to have his day in
court.
Also, noting the fact that there are processes underway to lodge an
appeal, we are obliged to allow the steady grind of the due process
of law to run its course without let or hindrance, respecting the
provisions of our Constitution in this regard.
Honourable Members: As we reflect on these matters, we should also
remind ourselves of the major issues, which were the original
source of this trial. Some three and half years ago, the Joint
Investigation Team of the Auditor-General, the Public Protector and
the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions completed its work
and released to Parliament a report on the Defence Procurement
Process. This Team came to the conclusion that:
"No evidence was found of any improper or unlawful conduct by the
Government. The irregularities and improprieties ... point to the
conduct of certain officials of the government departments involved
and cannot ... be ascribed to the President or the Ministers
involved in their capacity as members of the Ministers' Committee
or Cabinet. There are therefore no grounds to suggest that the
Government's contracting position is flawed".
With regard to matters of the cost of the Procurement, the
Investigation Team concluded that:
"What was achieved by the Affordability Team and the International
Offers Negotiating Team ... is unprecedented in the international
credit market".
On each of the allegations of impropriety with regard to the
primary contracts, in which government played a pivotal role, the
investigators found that there were cogent technical and/or
strategic reasons behind the decisions taken.
The Team identified some weaknesses in the procurement process, and
made recommendations which are being followed up, the better in
this regard continually to improve our work as government.
It also called for investigations on matters pertaining to
secondary contracts, in which, though government may have formally
played a role to ensure reliability and cost-effectiveness, the
arrangements were essentially between the companies chosen as
primary contractors and third party corporate
sub-contractors.
We refer to this matter in some detail because we believe that it
behoves all of us to recognise that the investigations that
resulted in the court case that has just been concluded were not
only recommended in that Joint Investigation Team Report, but were
also supported by the whole of government, including the Hon Deputy
President. These further investigations do not contradict the
fundamental conclusion about the integrity of the decisions of the
government with regard to the Defence Procurement.
No facts were adduced during the trial in question and no findings
were made that are inconsistent with the Report that the Joint
Investigation Team submitted to Parliament, a report whose
recommendations the government accepted.
Madame Speaker;
Having said all this, it remains for us to answer the question as
to how we should respond to some of the issues raised in the
Judgement handed down by Justice Squires.
It seems self-evident that, arising out of the judgement in the
Durban Trial, there will be continuing legal processes in the
higher courts.
These processes will have a bearing on normal enquiries that the
law-enforcement agencies may wish to undertake and on follow up
that Parliament may embark on in relation to any of its
Members.
The Executive will therefore await the outcome of these
processes.
Both the Deputy President and I are acutely sensitive to the
responsibilities we bear as prescribed by our Constitution.
We understand very well that we should at all times act in a manner
that seeks to "uphold, defend and respect the Constitution", as
required by the same Constitution.
As I have already indicated, this includes, among other things, the
need to "respect the constitutional status, institutions, powers
and functions of government in the other spheres", to quote the
Constitution once again.
We have had no precedent to guide us as we considered our response
to the Judgement by Justice Squires.
We have therefore had to make our own original determination on
this matter guided by what we believe is in the best interest of
the Honourable Deputy President, the Government, our young
democratic system, and our country.
I am fully conscious of the fact that the accused in the Schabir
Schaik case have given notice of their intention to lodge an
appeal.
I am equally aware that a superior court may overturn the Judgement
handed down by Justice Squires.
However, as President of the Republic I have come to the conclusion
that the circumstances dictate that in the interest of the
Honourable Deputy President, the Government, our young democratic
system, and our country, it would be best to release the Hon Jacob
Zuma from his responsibilities as Deputy President of the Republic
and Member of the Cabinet.
Necessarily, we will continue to monitor and respond to all
developments in relation to this and other relevant legal
processes.
Personally, I continue to hold the Hon Jacob Zuma in high regard,
and I am convinced that this applies to most Members of
Parliament.
We have worked together under difficult and challenging conditions
for thirty years.
In this regard, I wish to thank him for the service that he has
rendered as part of the Executive, at national and provincial
levels, sparing neither strength nor effort to ensure that, with
each passing day, we build a better life for all South
Africans.
I am certain that I speak on behalf of all who have served with him
in Cabinet when I say that we shall remain friends, colleagues and
comrades in the service of the people.
And, as government, we shall continue to draw on his experience and
expertise where the need arises. In due course, I shall announce
the necessary changes in the Executive to take account of the void
that the departure of Deputy President Jacob Zuma has
created.
I thank the Honourable Members for their presence at this Joint
Sitting of the Houses of Parliament and for the attention they paid
to what we had to say to address a difficult situation.
I trust that what we have done today, and will do in future,
together, will continue to strengthen our democracy, reinforce the
accountability of those who hold public office, and deepen the
confidence of the masses of our people in their elected
representatives and our organs of state.