Popinjays lead the left
Let me get this absolutely straight: “Jacob Zuma deserves his day in court in order to clear his name of spurious accusations that he somehow knew the source of half a million rand a year paid into his bank account, and that he somehow read the contents of a letter that he signed.”
Hmmm. Sounds fair.
“However, the act of actually putting Zuma in court makes it a political trial.”
Hmmm. The investigation of bribery and corruption cannot be political unless Zuma is innocent, which can’t be demonstrated unless he goes to court. So how can going to court be a political act?
“Therefore, when the police investigate the background to the case, including raiding the homes of proven criminals in Zuma’s entourage, this is unacceptable harassment.”
Wow. So trying to catch crooks is evil? Remind me of this fact the next time your home gets burgled!
“And therefore” (tada!) “all charges against Jacob Zuma should be dropped.”
Logically, my head should explode at this point. Basically, what the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) said was that Zuma should be presumed innocent, and since the only way to keep him being presumed innocent is to keep him out of court at any price, the entire criminal justice system has to go.
I’m shocked, but not terribly surprised, that the leaders of the SACP and Cosatu stand up boldly and support criminal businessmen and people who knowingly slander struggle heroes as apartheid agents.
And a little worried that Thabo Mbeki is now starting to look like Che Guevara next to the popinjays purportedly representing the left. — Mathew Blatchford, Fort Hare
It is most righteous of the president to talk in his latest newsletter of the proud traditions of the African National Congress, its observance of the rule of law and the presumption of innocence. Were these principles he himself observed before dismissing Zuma ignominiously from high office?
No, Zuma was “tried in absentia” and found guilty by association with Schabir Shaik.
To now declare with much fanfare that Zuma must be given “his day in court” is to make a mockery of our jurisprudence: a person should be tried in court first and then sentenced — not the other way round.
In his newsletter Mbeki, with innuendo directed at alliance partners, lays it down that nobody has the right to determine who our political leaders should be without regard to the democratic processes and traditions of the ANC. Is he himself above this fundamental requirement?
A commission of inquiry, as proposed, is not necessary to unravel the simple issues of natural justice in this matter, and any that might be set up would be devoid of credibility. If Mbeki had observed the basic principles he eloquently espoused in his newsletter, this crisis would not have arisen. It has now gathered its own momentum and cannot be wished away, even by 10-a-side in-camera deliberation.
The masses want to see justice done. And it will be. — Bhan Mahabir, La Lucia
It is very disturbing and confusing to see Cosatu and the South African Students Congress (Sasco) defending the former deputy president. I wonder what salaries and posts he has promised them? — Sydney Modiba, Namakgale
I was surprised that instead of condemning Sasco delegates from Kwazulu-Natal who walked out during Deputy President Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka’s address at the Sasco national general council, they were defended on the basis that their bus was waiting outside and they had to leave. Was the bus more important than an address by the second citizen of the country?
Was this not the very Sasco that issued a statement condemning the youth rebellion during the National Youth Celebrations throughout the country?
Support for Zuma should not mean withdrawing support for the president. The walkout shows that Sasco nationally does not have decisive and consistent political leadership. — Eric Mashao, Seshego
Zuma should be man enough to unambiguously exonerate the president from all platforms afforded him by the alliance, for that is the right thing for anyone aspiring to the highest office.
He should refrain from any insinuations that he has been treated unfairly — there can be no selective upholding of the rule of law.
Zuma: the real test of whether you have the character and strength to lead the country is now! Teach Cosatu, the SACP and the ANC Youth League what political maturity is all about, and that will endear you to the South Africa you fought and made sacrifices for. — Daliwonga Rasmeni, Soweto
JZ gets to power; Cosatu demands payback. Who can blame it? It has been instrumental in getting him the most powerful position in Africa. It knows he owes it. He knows he owes it. Big time.
Do we really want a president who is so indebted to others? Will he be able to do the things he really wants to do? Will he be a puppet or puppeteer?
Of course every politician is indebted to someone — politics is about exchanges. But in this case, the weight favours Cosatu.
I don’t think Cosatu is being fair to Zuma. It is acting out of self–interest; this whole charade is about what it can get out of a Zuma presidency. But does Zuma see it this way? — Khaya Dlanga, Cape Town
The Zuma affair has become the opium of the people, distracting them from the real issues facing our country. Let’s move on to ensure that all people “shall share the wealth of our country” and that poverty of all kinds, including ignorance, is no more. — Marilyn Aitken, Underberg
Singer off-beam on loveLife
I disagree completely with Rena Singer’s article on loveLife (“Is loveLife making them love life?”, August 19). After losing both parents to Aids by the age of 16, I was a confused teenage orphan and burden to my community. When I came across loveLife, I thought it was just another Aids organisation that was going to tell me about HIV and how to prevent it. No thanks. I’d had enough of seeing dying people on billboards, and I’d experienced it at first hand.
But loveLife was different; they concentrated on me. Who was I? What was I about and what did I enjoy doing? They helped me focus on what I wanted to become through their motivation programme.
Through their groundbreaker programme I had the opportunity to change and inspire young people’s lives in my community. loveLife made me realise that, even though I could not change the past, I was the architect of my own future.
Things started happening that I never thought possible — I was one of the young people who went to Rio in 2003. I learnt a lot. I appreciated my country a lot more — after my visit to the favellas, I realised I had much to be grateful for.
I also learned that young people across the world are the same. We have the same challenges of trying to fit in, poverty, teenage pregnancy — and, of course, Aids.
Three years later, my journey with loveLife has been phenomenal. I’ve been to amazing places, met wonderful people and spoken at many events. Yet nothing tops the experience of meeting young people who are optimistic about their futures and look forward to being part of a generation that is HIV/Aids-free. — Sibulele Sibaca, Cape Town
We welcome Singer’s article, and hope that the debate continues.
We were particularly interested by her assertion that NGOs are no longer short of funds for prevention. Our experience is that many potential funders are turning away from prevention programmes and directing their resources to medication, voluntary counselling and testing, and orphans and vulnerable children (OVC).
One of our funders recently turned down an application because in future “our work will be principally confined to OVC programmes and care programmes”.
This is despite the fact that the UNGASS Declaration of Commitment stated that prevention must be the mainstay of the response to the epidemic. — Kim Hope, Themba HIV/Aids Organisation
Trophy hunters a sad lot
Are your grandchildren going to ask: What is a cheetah? To those who kill for the sake of having a trophy on their wall, how pathetic you are! — Terry Bowler
It is widely accepted that hunting, if controlled and professionally conducted (for example, in accordance with the notion of “fair chase”), is not necessarily unethical. Also, one does not need to be a hunter to recognise that hunting can have conservation benefits, for example, in protecting natural areas from human development.
On the other hand, any hint of canned hunts and unscrupulous practices such as those highlighted in the Mail & Guardian (“We (almost) buy a canned cheetah”, August 12) should be strongly condemned.
Also, one cannot generalise. Some species, such as cheetahs, are much rarer, justifying efforts to prevent indiscriminate hunting.
The big question is how to measure the ethical component. Measuring the economics is easy — one just has to ask a hunter how much he is willing to pay to shoot a lion, cheetah or rhino. The ethical question becomes: How much would people pay to prevent those -animals being shot?
This raises a bigger question — if we accept that conservation, especially in South Africa, needs to pay for itself by generating revenues that can go back into conservation projects, we should not object to sustainable hunting that generates such revenues.
Opponents of hunting must demonstrate that their objections also make economic sense, for example, through donations or fund-raising with positive conservation spin-offs. — Rael Loon, Unicorn Conservation
We wish to voice our sheer horror at the practice of canned hunting. The government recently held hearings — we hope sense will prevail and it will be made illegal.– D March, White River
I read with dismay that canned hunting is still allowed. I commend the M&G for bringing this to light, and the government for being willing to bring about change. — Filo Mooney
We ask South Africans to support our efforts to bring canned hunting to the government’s attention. Sign our petition and help us reach our goal of a million signatures. We will be at malls, markets and events around the country and have established a website, www.sentience.co.za, for online signatures. — Lejane Hardy, Cape Town
Errors in Worldwide report
There were a number of errors in your report of August 5 headlined “Worldwide’s empire of influence”.
Worldwide African Investment Holdings is a privately owned company, and we cannot comment on your estimate of the value of our assets, except to say that R4-billion is an over-estimate. We can also not comment on the ownership of the company, as that, too, is private.
Worldwide’s shareholding has changed over the past 11 years, and individual and institutional shareholders have sold their shares in the business on a willing-seller, willing-buyer basis. There is no question of previous shareholders having been “ousted”.
Standard Corporate Merchant Bank did not fund the acquisition of Worldwide’s stake in Engen. This was done through Worldwide’s cash resources and other funding arrangements.
Industrial Development Corporation funding was obtained on commercial terms. We are not aware that the IDC or any of its executives was unhappy about the terms of the funding.
Worldwide Capital, a Worldwide associate company, and not Worldwide, bought the stake in Cadiz.
Worldwide’s stake in Uhambo will be held through Afric Energy Resources and not Afric Oil. Afric Energy Resources is the same entity that holds the company’s stake in Engen and Afric Oil.
The name of the previous CEO is Thuli Zuma, and not Thumi Xuma, as reported. Phuthuma Nhleko, and not Judge Skweyiya, is the non-executive chairperson of Worldwide. — Zellah Fuphe, MD Worldwide
Grim reminder
There seems to be a widespread perception that the term “Cape Flats” is acceptable.
In fact, it is a grim reminder of our oppressive past, as it refers to land where coloured people were dumped under the Group Areas Act.
The younger generation should know their parents were uprooted from Newlands, Claremont, Sea Point and Steurhof and dumped on the Flats. Conditions were terrible, and people had to trek great distances to work.
The words “Cape Flats” carry associations of degradation and marginalisation. Coloured people are demeaned by them.
How about the Greater Peninsula, a more uplifting and inclusive name? — Clement R du Plessis, Athlone
E-mail a letter to the editor
Please include your name and address. Letters must be received by 5pm Monday. Be as brief as possible. The editor reserves the right to edit letters and to withhold from publication any letter which he believes contains factual inaccuracies, or is based on misrepresentation.