02:47 GMT 21st December 2011
The move has sent shockwaves through the African National Congress (ANC), where members of the country's ruling elite have increasingly been accused of turning a blind eye to corruption within their own ranks. But civil society groups and members of opposition political parties have roundly applauded Zuma's actions. Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) congratulated the president on his 'firm action' and hoped this announcement marked a turning point in the fight against maladministration and corruption.
'From now on there must be a policy of zero-tolerance to the looting of public resources by anyone, in the public or private sector, no matter how senior their position,' a statement issued in late October by the union federation said.
The question marks over Zuma's commitment to justice arose because he initially appeared unwilling to act on allegations brought against his cabinet members by the public protector Thuli Madonsela who released reports earlier this year that concluded they acted unlawfully.
Madonsela found public works minister Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde's decision to approve a number of multi-million pound leases for police headquarters in Pretoria and Durban amounted to maladministration, as she had been legally advised to the contrary.
She also found that co-operative governance and traditional affairs minister Sicelo Shiceka had spent more than $120,000 of taxpayers' money in travel costs on himself, his staff and friends, which violated the executive ethics code. This included a trip to see a girlfriend in a Swiss jail on drug-related charges.
Police commissioner General Bheki Cele was also fingered by the public protector in a lease scandal involving minister MahlanguNkabinde, and he has been suspended pending further investigations.
However, it was the unveiling of the new inquiry into 1999 multi-million pound government arms deal that prompted the most interest, as Zuma was accused of accepting bribes connected to the deal when he was the country's deputy president.
During an October press briefing in Cape Town to outline the probe's terms of reference, justice minister Jeff Radebe said, 'The establishment of this commission and the commencement of its work represent a watershed moment in the history of democratic South Africa, in a quest to rid our nation of what has become an albatross that must now cease to blemish the reputation of our government and the image of our country.'
For over a decade South Africans have been crying out for proof about which politicians benefited from the millions of pounds investigators say international arms companies paid to leading members of the ANC to secure a slice of the lucrative defence procurement budget.
In 1999 the government decided it wanted to modernise its defence force's military equipment, and proceeded to buy warships, submarines, helicopters, fighter trainers and light fighter aircraft that cost the taxpayer billions of dollars.
Since then successive ANC governments have been fending off allegations at home and abroad that top officials were bribed by the companies that won the contracts, which included Europe's largest arms dealer, BAE, as well as ThyssenKrupp AG and Saab AB Local and international investigators have estimated that between $64m and $129m was paid out in bribes.
Extensive probes carried out by the public prosecutor and the national prosecuting authority have all been sidelined in one way or another by ANC governments since 2001, with the last inquiry shut down on September 21 2010 because police said it could take 10 years before prosecutions could take place.
Zuma, his predecessor Thabo Mbeki, the late defence minister Joe Modise and his aide Fana Hlongwane, and the well-connected Chippy Shaik, head of defence procurement at the time, are just some of the names that have been mentioned in relation to the arms deal.
Bribery charges against Zuma that arose from the scandal were controversially dropped a month before he was elected South Africa's president in 2009 because the National Prosecution Authority said phone-tap evidence suggested political interference in the case. Zuma has always denied the graft claims against him.
Indeed, only two people have been convicted on charges that have arisen from the scandal: Zuma's financial advisor, Schabir Shaik was given a 15-year sentence in 2005 for soliciting bribes on behalf of the president; and ANC MP Tony Yengeni was jailed for four years in 2004 after being found guilty of receiving a luxury car in return for ensuring the arms deal went ahead.
However, it is believed that many more people have a case to answer before the courts.
When Zuma made public in September his intention to open a new arms deal probe, some of his critics questioned whether those presiding over the investigation would have sufficient powers to get to the bottom of the scandal.
However, the presiding judges were given far-reaching powers within their terms of reference, including the ability to subpoena anyone to appear before them, and recommend legal action against people who improperly influenced contracts. 'They will have the power to subpoena anybody, including members of the executive,' said Radebe. Indeed, Zuma told a business breakfast in Cape Town in early November that he would appear before the inquiry to give evidence if called to do so.
According to the terms of reference, the commission of inquiry will investigate whether the arms and equipment purchased are underutilised or not utilised at all; if job opportunities expected to arise from the deal have materialised, to what extent, and the steps that ought to be taken to realise them; whether offsets anticipated to flow from the deal have materialised, to what extent and the steps that ought to be taken to realise them; whether anyone, in or outside the government, improperly influenced any of the contracts awarded and, if so, whether legal proceedings should be instituted against them, and the nature of such legal proceedings.
The probe will also assess whether there is any basis for pursuing such people to recover any losses that the state might have suffered as a result of their conduct.
The enquiry will take two years to complete its work and the final report will be submitted to the president, as well as interim reports every six months.
Zuma's decision to reopen the state's investigation into the arms deal has prompted much speculation about his motives, as the inquiry's outcome could have serious implications for his career given his own history with the scandal.
Andrew Feinstein, the previous head of the standing committee on public accounts who resigned from government when their arms deal investigation was squashed, said it was 'a good thing' the terms are broad. 'If the commission's judges have courage they would have the scope to investigate all allegations of corruption,' he said. But the terms of reference did not cover all necessary aspects of the arms deal, he said before adding it was problematic that the interim reports and final report only go the president.
'They include nothing about the thwarted investigations into the arms deal . .. also Zuma is a subject of the investigation as a result of allegations of corruption made against him and the prosecution of his former financial advisor Shabir Shaik,' he told the Maii&Guardian newspaper in October.
So what does Zuma have to gain by reopening this can of worms, other than acquiring the status as the man who belatedly restored the public's faith in government's commitment to fighting corruption?
There is a strong suspicion his motive was derived from being backed into a corner by members of the public who refused to allow the government to bury the issue.
On November 17, arms deal activist Terry Crawford-Browne was due to have an application to force Zuma to reopen the arms deal investigation heard by South Africa's constitutional court.
According to the Maii&Guardian, Zuma told his ANC national executive committee (NEC) in September he had decided to appoint a commission of inquiry into the arms deal to prevent the constitutional court from taking charge of the matter and prescribing the terms of reference for him.
However, some NEC sources told the weekly newspaper that some in the party believe Zuma had an ulterior motive linked to the factionalism that has beset the ANC over the past few years. They see Zuma's decision as a high stake strategic gamble designed to embarrass his party rivals, who may be called to give evidence by the commission, ahead of the ANC's elective conference next year, when the president is expected to seek a second term as party leader.
no comments
