The United Democratic Movement (UDM) welcomes President Zuma’s decision to appoint a commission of inquiry to investigate the arms deal. This commission will clear any doubts members of the public may have about the role played by the previous administration in the arms deal. It will also shed light on the role played in the arms deal by senior ANC leaders who were part of the previous administration who also hold senior positions in the current administration.

However, we cannot help but wonder why it has taken so long for the Government to do it. Could it be related to the amount of evidence destroyed?

The UDM proposes the following TERMS OF REFERENCE for the commission of enquiry:

a) The probe must be officially gazetted with clear Terms of Reference and time frames.

b) In the light of further revelations of the possible proliferation of irregularities in the entire deal, the investigation must go beyond examining sub-contracting procedures and cover the entire arms procurement transaction including the main contractors. What was the motive for the Cabinet Committee to opt for a British Aerospace expensive purchase against the advice of Defence Force and arms procurement negotiating team?

c) Attention must be drawn to the sub-committee, which was chaired by former President Mbeki, which apparently positioned itself as the “Tender Board” in the allocation of contracts with the view to bringing clarity regarding its role in the whole saga.

d) The need to empower the investigating agencies with the same authority previously enjoyed by the Heath Special Investigative Unit i.e. powers to cancel irregular contracts, etc.

e) Were any monies paid to individuals or political groups by tendering companies in order to facilitate the granting of contracts to themselves, such as in the case of British Aerospace which paid the ANC an amount of R5 million just prior to the awarding tenders?

f) Special focus be made on the possibility of individuals or groups holding public office being beneficiaries of monies or shares from international companies which have been awarded contracts.

g) The role played by individuals in the sub-committee chaired by former President Mbeki in the awarding of contracts and whether any of them received any payments or shares.

h) Are there any family members of the Mbeki sub-committee or close associates who benefited from the awarding of these contracts?

i) Whether the Black empowerment companies who were awarded sub-contracts had the capacity to perform or were mere fronts for the main contractors?

j) What were the motives for EADS in subsidising 30 motor vehicles sold to politicians, Armscor/Denel personnel, civil servants and Defence personnel as they had publicly confessed?

k) Whether the executive deliberately misled Parliament and the public about the true cost of the arms procurement exercise when they quoted it at R30 billion when in reality it is +R50 billion to date.

l) According to the Defence Review, R9.7 billion was focused for 1999 – 2006 financial years, as approved by Parliament. Who authorised the R30 billion expenditure? Did Parliament endorse this expenditure? Whether the Defence Review, which identified the Defence needs which culminated in the current arms procurement was a genuine analysis of our national Defence needs or a smokescreen to cover self-enrichment by individuals in the ruling party circles.

i. With special reference to the estimated R4 billion which ANC members who own sub-contracted companies in the arms procurement deal will earn and in particular the role played by the former Defence Minister, Mr J Modise and General L.A. Moloi in establishing the following companies, as suggested by financial media:

- Are these companies African Defence Systems (ADS)

- Futuristic Business Solutions

- Applied Logistics Engineering

- Nkobi Investments

- Temoso Technology

- M.K. Technologies

- X Cell

- Dynamic Cables

ii. conduits for channelling arms procurement funds back to ANC coffers? This must be investigated.

iii. Were these companies lobbied by the main international contractors who were awarded procurement contracts? Were they paid any monies by them and if so how much?

iv. Did these sub-contractors lobby any members of Parliament and ministers? If so did they pay them any monies and how much?

v. Whether the deal was able to create the 100 000 job opportunities the public were told it would create.

vi. Whether the companies who benefited from the arms deal fulfilled their promises about offsets.