Pretoria - President Jacob Zuma has released the long awaited Report of the Commission of Inquiry into allegations of fraud and corruption in the Strategic Defence Procurement Package (SDPP).
The Commission, chaired by Judge Willie Seriti, was established by President Zuma in September 2011, to investigate allegations of fraud, corruption, impropriety or irregularity in the arms procurement process.
The 1999 purchases included Gripen fighter aircraft and Hawk lead-in fighter trainer aircraft for the air force, as well as frigates and submarines for the navy.
The allegations of mass corruption had sparked investigations in other countries, including the United Kingdom, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, and France.
The commission concluded its inquiry after four years - exceeding two years it had been given, said President Zuma.
The terms of reference for the commission, included whether the arms and equipment acquired are underutilised or not utilised at all; whether job opportunities anticipated to flow from the package have materialised at all.
The commission also looked into whether any person or persons within and/or outside the government of South Africa improperly influenced the award or conclusion of any of the contracts awarded and concluded, and if so whether legal proceedings should be instituted against such persons and what form they should take and; whether any contract concluded is tainted by any fraud or corruption capable of proof, such as to justify its cancellation, and the ramifications of such cancellation.
The commission held public hearings and saw 54 witnesses - including former President Thabo Mbeki-being called to testify before the commission.
The final report, which consist of three volumes, was submitted to President Zuma on 30 December 2015.
Findings of the commission
1. On the rationale for the package, President Zuma said the commission found that it was necessary for the South African National Defence Force to acquire the equipment it procured in order to carry out its constitutional mandate and international obligations of peace support and peace-keeping.
2. On the question of whether the arms and equipment acquired are underutilised or not utilised at all, the commission found that all the arms and equipment acquired are well-utilised.
3. On whether the job opportunities anticipated to flow from the package have materialised, the evidence tendered before the commission indicated that the projected number of jobs to be created through the arms procurement process was achieved.
“The commission states that the probabilities are that the number of jobs created or retained would be higher than eleven thousand nine hundred and sixteen,” said President Zuma.
4. On whether the off-sets anticipated to flow from the arms procurement have materialised, the commission found that it was “fair to conclude that the anticipated offsets have substantially materialised”.
President Zuma said adequate arrangements are in place to ensure that those who have not met their obligations do so in the immediate future.
5. On whether any person or persons improperly influenced the award or conclusion of any of the contracts in the procurement process, the commission found that the evidence presented before “It does not suggest that undue or improper influence played any role in the selection of the preferred bidders, which ultimately entered into contracts with the government”.
6. On whether any contract concluded through the procurement process is tainted by any fraud or corruption, the commission states that the widespread allegations of bribery, corruption and fraud in the arms procurement process, especially in relation to the selection of the preferred bidders and costs, have found no support or corroboration in the evidence, oral or documentary, placed before the commission.
“No evidence was found as well through the commission's own independent inquiries.”
The commission also probed the engagement of consultants by some of the bidding companies.
According to the commission, the large payments made to consultants, gave an impression that the money may have been destined to decision makers in the arms procurement process and that they may have been bribed.
However, not a single iota of evidence was placed before it, showing that any of the money received by any of the consultants was paid to any officials involved procurement, let alone any of the members of the Inter-Ministerial Committee that oversaw the process, or any member of the Cabinet that took the final decisions, nor is there any circumstantial evidence pointing to this.
“The commission states that the preferred bidders confirmed that the money was for the consultant's services and nothing else.
“Some of the individuals implicated in the allegations of wrongdoing gave evidence before the Commission and refuted the allegations and insinuation levelled against them. None of them was discredited as a witness,” said President Zuma.
Members of the Inter-Ministerial Committee that oversaw the whole process and recommended preferred bidders to the full Cabinet as well as key members of the technical teams that conducted the extensive evaluations of all the offers, gave evidence before the commission.
They all refuted any suggestion that they may have been unduly influenced or any way manipulated to produce the relevant scores or rankings.
“None of them was discredited as a witness nor was there any credible evidence placed before the Commission to refute their testimony,” said President Zuma, adding that other than the Lead-in Fighter Trainer (LIFT) programme, the Inter-Ministerial Committee accepted, unaltered, the results of the evaluations produced by the technical teams and recommended to the full Cabinet, the preferred bidders identified by the technical evaluations.
Where the Cabinet took a different decision, for example the selection of the BAW Hawk aircraft for the LIFT programme, President Zuma said they gave full reasons of the strategic nature for this decision.
Moreover, the commission said there was no evidence that such a decision was tainted by any improper motives or criminal shenanigans.
“There was also no basis whatsoever for disbelieving the evidence submitted by the members of the Inter- Ministerial Committee in this regard.”
The Commission concluded by stating that there was no room for it to draw adverse inferences, inconsistent with the direct, credible evidence presented to it, in respect of all material aspects of the Terms of Reference. – SAnews.gov.za
