National Conventional Arms Control Bill: briefing

NCOP Security and Justice

25 September 2002
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
25 September 2002
NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL ARMS CONTROL BILL: BRIEFING


Documents handed out:
National Conventional Arms Control Bill [B50D-2000] pdf file

Chairperson: Mr LM Mokoena (ANC)

SUMMARY
The Chairperson of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee informed the Committee that the government policy on arms sales was guided by adherence to UN principles on human rights and democracy. The Minister pointed out that South Africa was the first country in the world to say that decisions on arms control must be taken at political level. South Africa had a policy of restraint in matters of arms sales and that in this respect no sales could be made to countries whose human rights records were suspect.

Briefing by Chairman of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee
The Minister informed the Committee that he had been chair of the NCACC since 1995. He pointed out that South Africa was the first country in the world to say that decisions on Arms control must be taken at political level. He noted that South Africa had a policy of restraint in matters of arms sales and that in this respect no sales could be made to countries whose human rights records are suspect.

The Minister informed the Committee that the issue of arms sale was a delicate balance between acknowledging the existence of an arms industry in the country and the need to project responsible governance on the international arena. He said that under the Constitution, SAPS and the NDF require capacity to carry out their mandates. He continued that should the countries' arms capability run down, the country would depend on outside supply of arms which meant such suppliers would significantly control the country's foreign policy.

The Minister pointed out that the country had expansive borders and UN missions that required significant armoury. He pointed out that the Government had both moral and ethical responsibility on arms sales. He noted that compared to the US which made sales to the tune of $100 million annually, South Africa's annual R 10 billion arms sales was nominal.

The Minister informed the Committee that decisions on sales were based on intelligence reports that were gathered on prospective buyers and that all applications are carefully scrutinised by a strategic committee, which then makes recommendations to the cabinet before a final decision, is taken.

The Minister emphasised the importance of Parliamentary participation throughout the year pointing out that the crisp question is how much exports should be made without portraying the country's foreign policy in the negative light. He admitted that this was a most intricate question for decision-makers. He however noted that so far there has never been an allegation that the country's arms control policy has been found wanting in any way howsoever.

The Minister concluded his brief by pointing out that South Africa does not supply arms to any country involved in conflict. He gave the example of China, Pakistan and the DRC as countries that face an arms embargo by South Africa. He explained that the sum total of all this was that there is a delicate line to navigate between selling to everyone and principled restrain. The Minister said that he was happy to report that so far the country has done very well on this score noting that politics and arms sales ethics are very controversial issues.

Discussion
Mr Ackermann (NNP) referred the Minister to Clause 25 of the Bill, which dealt with the Parliamentary Committee and asked whether it would consist of Members of both Houses.

The Minister replied in the affirmative and assured the Committee that their participation in this crucial deliberation was of utmost importance. He however pointed out that to legitimise the process the Committee would have to adopt similar rules like that of the intelligence Committee. This he said was necessary in view of the sensitivity of the issues that would be deliberated upon. During its life span, there had never been a leak from the intelligence Committee and that therefore sticking to the ground rules was of utmost importance.

Ms Kgoali (ANC) concurred with the Minster that ground rules must be adhered to if the process is to carry forward with credibility.

Briefing by the National Conventional Arms Control Committee
Mr Fred Marais informed the Committee that the Government had since the democratic election in 1994 committed itself to a policy of non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control. These measures covered all weapons of mass destruction and extended to concerns relating to the proliferation of conventional weapons. The primary goal of the government's policy was to enforce and promote South Africa as a responsible producer and possessor of and trader in defence-related products and advance technologies.

Mr Marais informed the Committee that on 30 August 1995, Cabinet approved an interim Arms Control Policy which formed an integral part of the Government's commitment to democracy, human rights, sustainable development, social justice and environmental protection. The interim arms control policy was based on the Armaments Development and Production Act, 1968 (Act No. 57 of 1968). In 1997 the National Conventional Arms Control Committee initiated a drafting process for a new Bill.

Mr Marais informed the Committee that Cabinet had approved the National Conventional Arms Control Committee, which would be set up in terms of the statute with clear reference terms. He pointed out that the National Conventional Arms Control Bill aimed to establish a National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC), which he said, would ensure compliance with the Government Policy on arms control. The Bill would enable the NCACC to ensure the implementation of a legitimate, effective and transparent control process, which would foster national and international confidence in the control procedures.

Mr Marias said that the aim of the Bill was to ensure the implementation of a legitimate, effective and transparent control process, which would foster national and international confidence in the control procedures. The Bill provided for an inspectorate to ensure compliance with the provision of this Act and that it makes provision for guidelines and criteria to be used when assessing applications for permits made in terms of the Act. The Bill aimed to ensure adherence to international treaties and agreements. The Bill would ensure proper accountability in the trade in conventional arms and other matters connected therewith.

Discussion
Ms Kgaoli (ANC) asked how many members would be in the NCACC Committee beside the Minister. She also wanted to know how the Chair would be appointed and by whom.

Mr Marias said that Clause 5 of the Bill makes provision on the composition of the Committee and who its chair would be.

Ms Kgaoli referred to Clause 11 at page 7 of the Bill where sub-section (c) refers to a sub-committee and wanted to know who would constitute the sub-committee.

Mr Marais replied that the NCACC is empowered to establish a sub-committee whenever it deems it necessary to effectively carry out its mandate.

Ms Kgoali asked if the Department had a contingency budget for the Bill.

Mr Marais replied that the only budget available was that which was from the directorate of defence and that the NCACC did not have a separate budget of its own.

Ms Kgaoli noted that routine inspection was limited to office hours and wondered what would happen should an emergency arise after office hours.

Mr Marais pointed out that the Minister was empowered by a letter to appoint anyone to carry out inspection duties.

Ms Kgaoli clarified that she had no problem with the appointment of an inspector but that such a person's responsibilities were limited to normal working hours and her concern was that an emergency could crop up after hours and there would be nobody to attend to it.

Mr Ackermann (NNP) explained that inspection could be carried out any time if the need arose. He added that there was no provision limiting the inspector's duties to working hours.

Mr Marais agreed with Mr Marias and pointed out that inspectors had the competence to carry out both proactive and pre-emptive inspection and that where special circumstances arose an inspector would be designated to attend to the situation no matter what time that would be.

Mr Horne (NNP) referred to Clause 23 at page 10 of the Bill sub-section 1(b), which made reference to a 'committee of Parliament determined by Parliament'. He said there was no mention of intelligence rules and wondered where the Minister got this idea.

Mr Radebe (legal advisor) explained that there was reference to rules to be prescribed and that the Minister would prescribe such rules as per sub-section 2(a) of the clause.

Mr Mkhalipi (ANC) said that there was an indication that the public had made submissions in regard to the Bill. He asked for details of the composition of attendance and the kind of response the Department had from the public during these hearings.

Mr Marais said that the conduct of public hearings was a process initiated by Parliament and that therefore he was not privy to the content of the public in-put to the Bill.

Mr Mkhalipi (ANC) insisted that it was necessary to be apprised on how the public in-put had shaped the character of the final draft of the Bill.

Mr Radebe said that it was Parliament in conjunction with the State Law Advisor who made arrangements for public hearing and that the Department had nothing to do with the process.

Ms Kgaoli reiterated her previous remarks that the Committee had never been taken seriously especially by the Department. She wondered why the State Law Advisor was not in attendance to assist Members understand the Bill.

Mr Horne (NNP) referred to Clause 27(1) where the Minister is empowered to make regulations and inquired whether there would be some form of consultation with the Committee to which Mr Marias replied in the affirmative.

Mr Nyakane (UDM) wondered how one would satisfy himself/herself that the purchased arms would be put to the use for which they were procured.

Mr Marais said that this was a fundamental question but noted that as the Minister indicated earlier there was a political body that took various aspects in consideration when taking the decision on sale of arms. A country with a suspect human rights record might not stand a chance of procuring arms from the country. He continued that the Department of defence was duty bound to ensure that arms were used only for purposes for which they were purchased.

Mr Marais added that Department officials, through pre- and post- purchase inspection undertook this process. He explained further that a sale was most importantly predicted upon a receiving country's international integrity in upholding human rights but that this is at the end of the day a political decision whose rules are not cast in stone.

The Chair referred to Clauses 19, 20 and 24 and asked for an explanation on what happened in situations where an offence was committed and the suspect went to neighbouring country for shelter.

Mr Radebe replied that where the government had an extradition treaty with such a state the person would be extradited to come and face those particular charges in the domestic court.

Mr Nyakane (UDM) pointed out hat the quorum of the Committee must be balanced to allow for specialised skills in this area.

Mr Marias agreed that the quorum of the Committee was a pertinent issue but that this rests with Parliament, whose responsibility it was to constitute the Committee. He continued that specialised skills were not necessary since the Department would already have worked out technical matters. The Committee's role, he explained, was to merely reach a political decision.

The Chair informed members that deliberations on the Bill would commence in mid October.

The meeting was adjourned.

Audio

No related

Documents

No related documents

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: