Not only has the taxpayer had to fork out almost a million rand a month for the VIP protection of the African National Congress (ANC) president Jacob Zuma, but the public purse has also provided R2,3-million to pay for the legal fees of suspended police National Commissioner Jackie Selebi.
Nathi Mthethwa, the Safety and Security minister, confirmed both these figures in written replies to questions from the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Freedom Front Plus (FF+).
”It is totally unacceptable that taxpayers’ money is being used for Selebi’s legal fees,” said Pieter Groenewald of the FF+ on Friday.
”Selebi had in his personal capacity, in order to salvage his own honour, submitted an application to the court. The application was not in the interest of the South African Police Service. Taxpayers’ money can also not be used for Selebi’s criminal case. The charges do not result from the execution of his duties and that is why Selebi has to foot his legal bill himself.”
The previous minister Charles Nqakula said that Selebi’s costs are being paid by the state in terms of Section 3 of the State Prosecutor’s Act. But Groenewald points out that this section only provides for cases where actions are in the public’s interest or where the state has an interest in a case.
”In Selebi’s case not one of these aspects is at play,” he said. ”Now that an amount is known, a complaint will be lodged with the Public Protector in order to determine whether taxpayers’ money is not being misappropriated,” Groenewald said.
Dianne Kohler-Barnard for the DA has now also asked for a breakdown of police spending on the ANC president as well as other former deputy presidents and presidents.
VIP protection for Zuma
Mthethwa told her on Thursday that VIP protection for Zuma was costing the taxpayer R998 815 a month. It was spent on close protection, static protection, overtime, vehicle and telephone costs.
In a letter to Mthethwa on Friday, Kohler-Barnard said this appeared to be an excessive level of spending on any one individual. ”And I would request that you provide a further breakdown of the police service’s expenditure on Mr Zuma, and details of why this is deemed necessary, and what specific threats could warrant such extensive protection,” she said.
”In order to dispel the notion that political favouritism has played a role in granting Mr Zuma such extensive security services, I would also kindly ask that you provide details of SAPS [South African Police Service] expenditure on protection services for other past and present government leaders — including former deputy presidents Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka and FW de Klerk, former president Thabo Mbeki and President Kgalema Motlanthe.”
The leader of the United Democratic Movement, Bantu Holomisa, has also leapt into the fray commenting on the ”extravagant level of security” given to Zuma at taxpayer expense. Taxpayers are the victims of a policy vulnerable to exploitation, he said.
Making an electioneering point and referring to his own manifesto, Holomisa said: ”Much of this situation could be resolved if we have a separately elected president who is directly accountable to the citizens.
”Then privileges could not be abused by the political party he belongs to, because currently it seems the ANC is using presidential privileges as perks and golden handshakes for those who they deploy and remove from high office without consulting the voters or their representatives in Parliament.” — I-Net Bridge