A closed meeting of the parliamentary joint committee on ethics and members’ interests has apparently cleared Deputy President Jacob Zuma of all charges of alleged non-declaration of benefits required in terms of South Africa’s parliamentary code of conduct.
While official confirmation could not be received from committee chairperson Lluwellyn Landers on Wednesday afternoon, it is understood that Zuma was cleared of three charges before the committee concerning amounts amounting to more than R1-million — which Zuma has argued were loans.
Loans need not be declared in terms of the code.
National Director of Public Prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka referred the matter of non-declaration of benefits to the Speaker of the National Assembly — which led to the ethics committee inquiry. However, Ngcuka had earlier opted not to prosecute Zuma for allegedly attempting to secure a half-a-million rand bribe from a French firm involved in the arms deal.
On Wednesday evening Democratic Alliance MPs serving on the committee issued a statement ”strongly” rejecting the majority view of the parliamentary committee. They reported that Zuma had been cleared ”of all charges”.
Democratic Alliance MPs Errol Moorcroft and Hendrik Schmidt said the loans and financial agreements ”constitute substantial financial benefits which the deputy president failed to declare”.
”He is therefore, in our view, in contravention of the parliamentary code of ethics,” they said.
”The documents with which the committee dealt reflected a most unusual set of financial circumstances, which raised serious questions of credibility. There were for example serious contradictions, which called for further investigation.
”The minority view was that it was essential for the affected parties to be required to give evidence before the committee to explain these contradictions. This was rejected by the majority.
”The code is clear on what should happen when disputes arise, viz hearings must be held. To deny this basic requirement, as it has now happened, is to render the code, and the committee, redundant.
”The ethics committee, by claiming to clear Mr Zuma when so many questions remain unanswered, has shown it has little concern for the ethical standards which the public expect of their elected representatives,” they added. — I-Net Bridge