July 17 to 23 2009

I did not flip-flop, I just changed my mind

Nic Dawes, the editor of this paper[,] has engaged in the most nefarious, dishonest and downright despicable act of news headlines fabrications and false attributions of quotations in regard to a story he wrote about my alleged ‘flip-flopping” in my support for Cape Judge President Hlophe.

Dawes claims that a series of email exchanges between UCT Registrar Hugh Amoore and myself shows that I had changed my support for Hlophe by November 2008. The amateurish attempt by Nic Dawes to create a story shows the desperation of these anti-Hlophe elements, an absolute panic in which all instruments of fabrications, lies and perjury are used. Let me deal with the undisputable facts that refute once and for all the despicable lies told by Nic Dawes.

A few weeks ago, this editor of the Mail & Guardian received my Op-Ed piece in which I specifically refuted Hugh Corder’s opportunistic attempt to use the 2007 contempt issue against Hlophe. Corder had falsely alleged that Hlophe acted improperly by finding an advocate in contempt. Dawes assiduously carved out of my article a statement that read as follows: ‘The most disingenuous and opportunistic criticism revolves around the matter where Hlophe found an advocate in contempt of court. I was the first person at the UCT to criticise Hlophe in writing on that very issue.

‘I complained that the deafening silence of the white law professors and advocates was because the advocate involved was black. It later emerged that the advocate was informed in advance that a trial was scheduled in the High Court.

‘Certainly no seasoned legal practitioners would allow a routine calendar matter in a magistrate’s court to prevent him from appearing in a matter that is on a firm trial schedule in the High Court. That is called prioritizing and common sense. To do otherwise is to invite a contempt finding. In any event, if the advocate was truly aggrieved, he had plenty of avenues available including appeal and filing complaints with the JSC. Rather than pursue them, he accepted both the finding and the punishment as appropriate. Corder now wants to revive and re-argue the matter in the newspapers simply to tarnish Hlophe’s reputation.”

The premise of my argument was simple: IF the newspaper stories that Hlophe abused his contempt powers were true, then he could be validly criticised and even removed for the alleged transgression.

When Dawes finally published my article in June 2009 he edited the statement out of my submission simply because he though he could opportunistically use the alleged unpaginated lengthy UCT email for nefarious and mischievous purposes as he has done.

The support Hlophe has earned and received from many of us is not based on blind loyalty or racial solidarity as some of his racist detractors have insisted. It is critical and principled support based on a solid foundational principle — willingness to criticize fairly and where criticism was deserved, honest dispassionate investigation of the facts and absolute equality of treatment for Hlophe. My very first Cape Times article about Hlophe was both critical and supportive. I state unequivocally that if the November 2007 newspaper story about Hlophe’s abuse of power [had] been true I would have been the first to call for his impeachment notwithstanding any support I had given before. I was ready to do so but happily the story turned out to be false and malicious. That is called principle not ‘flip-flopping”.

What is most disturbing about Dawes’ actions is that he has deliberately misread the alleged email of January 11, 2008 to mean November 11, 2008 in a desperate effort to show that I have ‘now revised” my opinion after all the support I have given to Judge President Hlophe over many months. That shows not only Dawes’ true colours but also his willingness to attribute false quotations to subjects of his stories. This appears clearly from Dawes’s flagrant lie that ‘Ngobeni admits sending an email in January this year addressing some of the issues —” Dawes twists his own misreading of the January 11, 2008 email to manufacture another sub-text to the false story that I ‘admitted” to the claptrap he writes about in the paper.

Hugh Amoore’s email to which the alleged email responds cites conversation with a Professor De La Rey, then acting Vice-Chancellor. Clear evidence shows that Professor De La Rey, another person to whom the alleged email referred to in the email, quit her UCT employment in January 2008 and as such could not have been receiving emails about Hlophe during the period alleged by the hallucinating Dawes.

The desperation on the part of white racists in the Hlophe has reached crisis level — throw everything at Hlophe and his supporters even at the risk of discrediting themselves through transparent lies. Hugh Corder tried to hijack the same issue and claimed credit for it even though I roundly criticised him and his buddies for their indifference on the matter. I remain absolutely convinced that Hlophe is eminently qualified because the lies these folks tell about him are forever transparent and easy to expose! Thanks Nic Dawes for exposing the willingness of whites to lie in order to get Hlophe.

What Dawes did is so underhanded, so dishonest and dirty that no vulture would eat his carcass even if he were to die in the wild. An email sent on a UCT account will clearly have identifying features including dates and if printed will show other identifying information — something patently lacking from the fake document used by Dawes. I was greatly disturbed by the initial newspaper stories about Hlophe’s alleged conduct and was prepared to take action. The story turned out to be patently false.

Dawes simply manufactured a non-story to sell newspapers. — Paul Ngobeni

M&G notes: This letter is unedited apart from two insertions, for the sake of clarity, in square brackets.

Nic Dawes replies: The email in question had an American date format, so I confused 11 January (1/11 in US style), the date when it was actually sent, with 1 November (1/11 in UK style). Paul Ngobeni had the opportunity to correct this when he spoke to Sello Alcock about the email, but instead he seized upon the discrepancy to claim that it was a fake. He also had the opportunity during his disciplinary hearing at UCT to contest the authenticity of the email, which he chose not to do. I am convinced the email is genuine, and that it provides insight into the thought processes of someone who is an important player in a major national debate. Whether he has flip-flopped in his support of Judge John Hlophe is for readers to decide, but I would submit that to call for Hlophe’s impeachment, and describe him as a jerk, and then to call for his appointment to the top judicial job in the country, is a major about-turn.
Ngobeni claims he changed his mind when he had all the facts. The facts in this matter are available on our website. Judge for yourself.

Lights on? Anybody home?

The story ‘Doctors use a torch to do operations” (July 3) is biased. All our hospitals in Bushbuckridge are properly functioning, so the argument that doctors operate with a torch and, when batteries run out, with a candle, is unfounded.

The journalist could have interviewed management as opposed to capitalising on the striking doctors to get a damaging comment. It is beyond doubt that the interviewed doctor, an intern at the hospital, commented out of anger.

We find it offensive that a journalist runs a story from one angle, in contravention of journalistic ethics, and has to a large degree misinformed the country by exaggerating the situation. All our hospitals in Bushbuckridge, namely Mapulaneng, Matikwane and Tintswalo, have service providers appointed to address such issues.

The fact that the theatre bulb was not functioning for a day does not mean the situation is recurring.

If indeed the situation was as reported in the Mail & Guardian, it would have been management’s prerogative to have patients awaiting operations transferred to other hospitals. That measure was not taken, showing that the situation at Mapulaneng hospital is under control and does not pose any danger to patients.

To sum up, your journalist is anti-government and a counter-revolutionary whose pleasure derives from defaming government’s character. — Matome Malatji, communication manager, Bushbuckridge Local Municipality

Concerned doctors respond:
Every day doctors and nurses in this province are carrying the burden of controlling damage caused by mismanagement and the incompetence of individuals in the system. The fact is that we work in conditions that are appalling and patients suffer daily because of bills that haven’t been paid, such as service contracts for equipment (X-ray machines, anaesthetic machines, sonar machines). Medicine suppliers withhold stock because of non-payment.

Maintenance has no money to fix bathrooms or the hot-water supply, and toilets overflow, drains are blocked and there is even raw sewage running through the fences of our hospitals on occasion.

Wards at Shongwe hospital are full of patients who have come in over the past three weeks, on whom we have been working without X-ray facilities. Tonga Hospital was helping us out where they could, but personnel there have also had enough.

It is nothing to change a theatre bulb if it is in stock! But 99% of the time it wouldn’t be in stock, unless the theatre manager had ordered some extra stock on his or her own initative, which would be beyond his or her scope of practice — and would be covering up for an incompetent stores manager.

The mention of lighting a candle is a figure of speech showing the frustration of a doctor bending over backwards to do damage control. No one in his or her right mind would light a candle in such close proximity to an oxygen source, although sometimes it feels as though that would be the only available option to get this system sorted out. Perhaps there would be no explosion because the oxygen was probably not ordered either.

The letter from the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality is a ploy to divert attention from the inadequacy of management and its inability to provide optimal conditions for doctors to perform even basic procedures safely. This system was functional before. The state it is in now is a symptom of the incompetence of the people in charge.

In brief

The decision to drop the environmental programme 50/50 from the SABC cannot be due to financial reasons. It had a sponsor, so there are no problems selling advertisements. The real reason, to my mind, is the inability of the ANC to tolerate scrutiny of its actions and decisions, or lack thereof. South Africa is a democracy and we want the programme back! — Izak Gelderblom, Kimberley

Roger Martinez from Alaska wants to boycott South African wines because Marine Coastal Management decided to shoot the stranded whales at Noordhoek (Letters, July 10). I will be boycotting McDonald’s because Sarah Palin had a shot at the American (vice) presidency. — Gert Coetzee

Condescending of Herr Blatter to score us 7.5 out of 10 for the Confederations Cup. I would like to score him and his organisation two out of 10 for their convoluted ticket-procurement process and one out of 10 for buggering around with national anthems. Who do these arrogant Europeans think they are? — Peter Auld, Sandton

How’s Schabir Shaik’s health? Wasn’t he terminal? — Theo Martinez, Johannesburg