Questions that need answers

And its current disintegration.

The suspension of national archivist Dr Graham Dominy and his colleague Clive Kirkwood and the failure to reinstate them after their successful appeal highlight a deeper malaise.

This curious matter carries with it the smell of nepotism, attempts by an elected public representative to hijack selection processes, mendacious ­allegations with a view to creating opportunities for personal advancement, corruption of an ­internal ­disciplinary process and malicious attempts to discredit and render insolvent two individuals seeking to uphold their good names and reputations.

Their reputations derive from more than three decades of service and their exemplary careers.

The list of these machinations does not address the issue of the scarce skills that will be lost to the state and the country if this corrupt plot succeeds.


The department of public administration would be well advised to institute a full-scale enquiry into the department of arts and culture and its handling of this matter from beginning to end.

What needs to be researched, explained and made public are the answers to at least the following questions:

  • What processes of selection were under way in the department of arts and culture when accusations were levelled at the two officials and initial suspension and disciplinary action were invoked?
  • Which people connected with senior elected representatives were candidates for selection for senior posts in the department at that time?
  • Who made the allegations against the two officials?
  • When and how were the allegations first made?
  • Did any internal processes follow the initial allegations and what were the outcomes of earlier processes?
  • Who stood to gain from the ­sidelining of the two officials?
  • Have any of these benefitting people played any role in the ­department’s handling of this matter?
  • What is the total amount of state funds spent on the legal teams hired by the department in pursuing action against the two officials?
  • Who authorised this expenditure on legal proceedings, and on what grounds?
  • How many state legal advisers and how many members of the Bar did the department consult or instruct on this matter?
  • What was the nature of the advice given by the department’s legal advisers on the merits of the allegations against the two officials?
  • Have any state officials been required to stand surety or to accept responsibility for the funds spent on legal proceedings without any real prospect of achieving success?
  • How many of the department’s staff in decision-making and advisory roles, in pursuit of this action against the two officials, have been specifically named in Parliament as abusers of financial procedures?
  • How is it possible that an allegedly qualified presiding officer at an internal hearing can find the two officials guilty of charges that were never specified, were never laid and upon which no evidence or argument was led?
  • Were there any interactions between the presiding officer and department officials in terms of which draft findings were discussed prior to their release some six weeks later than the required deadline?
  • What was the department of arts and culture’s response to the required conciliation process? Who formulated that response, and on what grounds?
  • What has happened since the appeal finding by the arbitrator ordered the reinstatement of the two officials?
  • What is the expenditure incurred by the two officials in defending themselves?

Is there evidence to suggest mala fides operating in the pursuit of extended legal processes with the express purpose of bankrupting the two officials? – Tim Dunne, Cape Town

The Mail & Guardian has asked the department of arts and culture to respond to this letter and to the original piece by Shula Marks. They will do so in coming weeks.

Subscribe to the M&G

These are unprecedented times, and the role of media to tell and record the story of South Africa as it develops is more important than ever.

The Mail & Guardian is a proud news publisher with roots stretching back 35 years, and we’ve survived right from day one thanks to the support of readers who value fiercely independent journalism that is beholden to no-one. To help us continue for another 35 future years with the same proud values, please consider taking out a subscription.

Related stories

Activists fight to keep SA’s historical documents safe

"Memory activists" are fighting to keep our archives safe and accessible, but government has to choose between this and the pressing needs of people.
Advertising

Vaccine trial results due in December

If successful, it will then have to be manufactured and distributed

White men still rule and earn more

Women and black people occupy only a few seats at the JSE table, the latest PwC report has found

The PPE scandal that the Treasury hasn’t touched

Many government officials have been talking tough about dealing with rampant corruption in PPE procurement but the majority won't even release names of who has benefited from the R10-billion spend

ANC still at odds over how to tackle leaders facing...

The ANC’s top six has been mandated to work closely with its integrity committee to tackle claims of corruption against senior party members
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…

The best local and international journalism

handpicked and in your inbox every weekday