/ 17 February 2003

Yengeni gets down on his knees

Former African National Congress chief whip Tony Yengeni was described as a rotten apple on Monday by the prosecution in his fraud trial, but the defence argued he was an honourable man vilified by the media.

”The accused plucked the apple of privilege and favour and brought to Parliament a smell of rotten apples,” prosecutor Gerda Ferreira argued in aggravation of sentence in Pretoria’s Commercial Crimes Court.

”He gave in to the temptation inherent to his position of power.”

Charges against the MP relate to a 47% discount he received on a luxury 4X4 Mercedes Benz in 1998.

Ferreira argued that Yengeni deliberately and repeatedly violated the trust placed in him — and should be punished accordingly.

For his part, defence counsel Viwe Notshe told Magistrate Bill Moyses: ”You have before you a man who has decided to fall on his sword and plead guilty because it is the honourable thing to do.

”The accused has thrown himself before you and is asking for mercy.”

He asked for a R1 000 fine, saying this was all Yengeni could afford. The trial was postponed to March 19 for sentencing. Yengeni was convicted of fraud last week after pleading guilty in terms of a plea agreement with the State. He was, in return, acquitted of corruption.

Notshe argued his client has been punished enough. He has suffered public humiliation, was demoted from his position as chief whip, and has been ”slaughtered” in the media.

Yengeni also suffered huge financial losses. His first legal team withdrew from the case because he owed them money — reportedly some R800 000.

”This infamous 4X4 has become the most expensive 4X4 in South Africa,” Notshe said.

”The benefit of the discount he received has been eroded by subsequent events.”

Yengeni pleaded guilty to defrauding Parliament by failing to disclose the benefit he received. Included in the guilty plea was that he helped draw up a false agreement of sale to try and explain how the car deal came about.

He also confessed to lying in a newspaper advertisement he took out to proclaim his innocence.

In considering an appropriate sentence, the court should consider the circumstances in which the fraud was committed, Notshe said. This included ”ambiguity” in a Parliamentary code of conduct as to what exactly constituted an improper benefit.

He also argued that no victim suffered any material loss in this case. The only victim was Parliament, and its only loss was potential damage to its integrity.

Yengeni was a first offender and had shown remorse by pleading guilty and making a clean breast of things, Notshe said

”Society will not bay for his blood. Society will say: ‘Yes, punish the man, but not to the point of being broken’.”

Ferreira argued that Yengeni abused his position of utmost trust, and acted in breach of his duties. As then chairman of Parliament’s joint standing committee on defence, he brought into question the country’s arms acquisition process by soliciting a benefit from a bidding company.

He abused his position to promote his own interests above those of the public he was supposed to be serving.

She rejected Notshe’s arguments of ambiguity in the code of conduct, saying it was quite clear that MPs had to declare any gift or benefit above R350.

After accepting the car deal, he showed no contrition or desire to come clean — instead proceeding to help draft the fraudulent agreement of sale. He then actively defrauded the people of South Africa by publishing an advertisement stating there was nothing untoward about the deal.

While it was true he was a first offender, it should be remembered that he made numerous misrepresentations -‒ defrauding Parliament each time, Ferreira argued.

She said the crime was driven by greed, not need. ”He just wanted to drive around in a very flashy car.”

Yengeni failed to show true remorse — only entering into a plea agreement when it became clear he would not be able to afford further legal representation.

She also dismissed arguments that Yengeni has suffered enough. There was no reason why an accused person’s self-inflicted agony should be taken into account in sentencing.

”Should the conviction be the end of the accused’s political career… he only has himself to blame.”

No person may be a Member of Parliament once convicted of a crime and sentenced to more than 12 months in jail without the option of a fine.

Ferreira said the sentence to be imposed on Yengeni should reflect society’s abhorrence of his crime.

The fraud and corruption trial of Yengeni’s co-accused, businessman Michael Woerfel, is to go ahead on March 19. The trials were separated after Yengeni changed his plea.

Woerfel has pleaded not guilty. He was at the time the head of Daimler-Benz Aerospace AG’s Pretoria representative office. He has been charged with corruption for allegedly arranging the car deal, and with fraud for the false sale agreement.

Daimler-Benz Aerospace was the manufacturer of the AT2000 — which was then being considered with two other light fighter aircraft as part of South Africa’s arms acquisition process. – Sapa