Hansard: Debate on Vote No 10 – National Treasury (State Security)
House: National Assembly
Date of Meeting: 14 May 2013
Summary
No summary available.
Minutes
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 514
TUESDAY, 14 MAY 2013
PROCEEDINGS OF EXTENDED PUBLIC COMMITTEE – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
____________
Members of the Extended Public Committee met in Committee Room E249 at 14:01.
House Chairperson Mr C T Frolick, as Chairperson, took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Takes: 514 & 515
START OF DAY
APPROPRIATION BILL
Debate on Vote No 10 – National Treasury (State Security):
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Hon House Chairperson, hon Members of Parliament, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and for other oversight bodies, the Acting Director–General and the leadership of the State Security Agency, SSA, invited guests and fellow South Africans, the year 2013 marks the 100th anniversary of the notorious 1913 Natives Land Act. In 1914 its staunch opponent, ANC President John Langalibalele Dube, led a delegation and made an incisive plea to the United Kingdom, and I quote:
It is only a man with a heart of stone who could hear and see what I hear or see and remain callous and unmoved. It would break your hearts did you but know, as I know, the cruel and undeserved afflictions wrought by the hateful enactment on numberless aged, poor and tender children of my race in this their native land. From the ashes of their burnt out kraals, kicked away like dogs by Christian people from their humble hearths, from their dear old scenes where their fathers were born and grew up in simple peace, bearing malice to none, and envying neither European nor Indian the wealth and plenty they amass themselves from this their land, these unfortunate outcasts pass homeless, unwanted, silently suffering, along the highways and byways of the land, seeking in vain the most unprofitable waste whereon to build their hovel and rest and live, victims of an unknown civilisation that has all too suddenly overwhelmed and overtaken them ...
As a young nation we have moved on a long and torturous road from colonial and apartheid oppression to a stable constitutional democracy. We are firm in our belief that we will not rest until our people are not just safe, but actually feel safe. As we continue to implement our collective national project of creating a national democratic society, we will spare no effort until our people are free from fear and want.
In 2012, the socioeconomic factors and global economic slowdown emerged as the prominent driving forces of risks to security and stability in our country. This was epitomised by the occurrence of continuing incidents of social service delivery protest, linked to various forms of perceived or experienced socioeconomic deprivation. In most cases these protests were related to basic human needs, including access to energy, shelter, safety and subsistence. While the majority of these protests were peaceful, it is of concern that some were violent and disruptive. In addition, violent industrial action tended to be protracted, illegal, unprotected, and disruptive to key sectors of the economy, with a new trend of the shunning of union representation and the hard-won established labour relations dispensation in South Africa.
President Zuma, in his state of the nation address, reminded the nation in general and intelligence services in particular of the duty to protect our Constitution, and I quote:
Our Constitution is truly one of our greatest national achievements. Everything that we do as a government is guided by our Constitution and its vision of the society we are building. ...
Our Bill of Rights guarantees that "(e)veryone has the right, peacefully and unarmed, to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket and to present petitions". ...
It is unacceptable when people's rights are violated by perpetrators of violent actions, such as actions that lead to injury and death of persons, damage to property and the destruction of valuable public infrastructure.
The citizens of our country have a right to expect that their democratic state will exercise its authority in defence of the Constitution that so many struggled so long and hard for. We cannot disappoint this expectation.
Let me be upfront and state loudly that in terms of our laws it is a crime to incite or participate in acts of violence during protests. Both the organisers and the participants must take full responsibility for the consequences of such violent actions, including allowing the carrying of dangerous weapons in public and the destruction of life and property. As a state we can no longer tolerate such abuse.
We have heeded the President's call. The whole security cluster is increasing its capacity and its focus on this scourge. We now have a plan and we are ready to deploy the full capacity of the democratic state in identifying, preventing, arresting and swiftly prosecuting those who undermine our Bill of Rights by engaging in such violent acts. The "eye of the nation" is watching.
Intelligence structures have implemented specific measures to provide early warning to law enforcement agencies and the relevant departments regarding planned protests that have the potential to turn violent. The assessments also focus on the underlying root causes in order to advise on a speedy and integrated response to grievances.
We call upon all law-abiding citizens to join us in a campaign for the restoration of the culture of ubuntu and respect for human rights. Let us reiterate that as a nation we have the right to engage in peaceful and unarmed protest action, but we will not allow criminality to prevail. We must defend our young democracy, work with our law enforcement agencies, strengthen our community safety forums and not be bystanders as criminality drags us all into anarchy. Let us unite and rise in defence of our democratic gains and the Constitution.
The process of restructuring the civilian intelligence community into a single department, the SSA, has almost been finalised with the imminent passing of the enabling legislation in Parliament. We have achieved a number of notable milestones. We have now finalised the new organisational structure and reconfigured line function areas in keeping with a new business case. We have matched and placed 87% of staff into a new SSA post establishment and the rest will be finalised this year.
We have a streamlined department, imbued with a new culture based on shared values captured in the acronym, Icare – Integrity, Commitment, Accountability, Reliability and Excellence.
Over time, the agency has avoided expenditure on non-value-adding projects. We have single asset register, payroll, budget management and financial accounting systems, resulting in the added benefit of considerable cost savings in the consolidation of supporting technologies and related licences. These measures have released considerable resources for our core business and the strengthening of operational or intelligence collection units.
Last year I informed this House about a project that would look at the remuneration management system of the agency. We want to ensure that it complies with legislative requirements and international best practice in making us an employer of choice. In April this year we received a report and we are currently engaging our members on this with the aim of finalising this by July.
For some time now we have been concerned about the financial sustainability of our in-house medical aid scheme, which is a crucial health care benefit for our members. This prompted us to initiate an assessment of the financial performance and future sustainability of our medical aid scheme. Health care actuaries were appointed to provide an in-depth analysis of the benefits provided to SSA members and the long-term financial feasibility of such benefits. The report was finalised in December and its recommendations are currently being explored, and some implemented.
We are making steady progress in co-operation with our veterans. We have finalised the engagement model and identified areas of interaction. I have directed the agency to consult with all our veterans regarding this model and the adoption of a draft constitution for the establishment of their association.
One of our primary quests is to ensure the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic. Previously we informed you that we were moving away from an inadequate and fragmented model to a fully integrated model of managing our entire border environment. We intended to begin with the land, and then to move to air and sea space, in order to eliminate irregular and illegal movement of goods and people across our borders.
The SSA led the process of establishing the Border Management Agency, BMA. We concluded the preliminary work and handed it over to the Department of Home Affairs for them to lead the preparation of the proclamation for the establishment of the BMA by next year. Pending the establishment of the BMA, the existing operational structures, such as the National Joint Operational and Intelligence Structure, Natjoints, and the National Joint Operational Centre, Natjoc, are being utilised to achieve the same objectives.
Subsequent to the approval of the National Cybersecurity Policy Framework, NCPF, by Cabinet in March last year, the key task was to establish structures to assist with the finalisation of the National Cybersecurity Policy and Strategy, and to implement it as we go on, because of the urgency to address these new threats. We have realised that specialised skills are critical for the success of these projects and they are currently being prioritised through training and recruitment by the relevant participating state agencies and departments.
The Cybersecurity Response Committee, CRC, which is a strategic priority-setting body responsible for the successful implementation of this framework, was established and has finalised its plans. Noticeable progress has been made in the establishment of the Cyber Security Centre and the Cyber Security Hub. Some of the technologies and infrastructure required to operationalise them have already been acquired. Internal discussion documents on cyber crime, cyber terrorism and the research and development in this environment have been produced. We continue to improve the protection frameworks in regard to cyber crime, cyber warfare and the National Critical Information Infrastructure, and these will receive priority this year. We have instructed the committee to focus on the finalisation of this policy as a matter of urgency.
The illicit economy continues to undermine our economy and this leads to a loss of business due to counterfeiting and smuggling. It includes areas such as: counterfeit goods; illicit trading in cigarettes; illicit mining; and copper theft. This illicit trade obstructs economic development; undermines government policy and the rule of law; supports corrupt practices; funds organised crime; undermines investment in legitimate manufacturing, innovation, trade and distribution by legitimate industry; and impacts negatively on employment.
The sale of illicit cigarettes and tobacco products, for example, has increased over the past four years. By the end of 2011 the illegal sale of cigarettes was more than 25% of the market sales in South Africa. The loss to the South African fiscus was estimated to be about R4 billion in unpaid taxes. Retailers lost R7 billion in turnover and R750 million in annual profits. This translates to a loss of almost 10 000 jobs in the tobacco industry over the past 10 years. Our neighbouring countries have lost similar revenue due to the nonpayment of taxes and excise duties.
Various steps have been taken during the period under review to address this phenomenon. We have established an interdepartmental national task team consisting of the SA Police Service, the SSA, the SA Revenue Service, the Asset Forfeiture Unit, the Financial Intelligence Centre and the National Prosecuting Authority. Sometimes it includes representatives of the tobacco industry. We expect to see positive results soon as a result of this intervention.
In 2013 the government and the ruling party have directed us to expedite the process of the development and finalisation of the National Security Strategy. The SSA and the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security, JCPS, Cluster have already covered a lot of ground in preparing the draft document and we hope to submit it for Cabinet approval within the next three months. Thereafter it is critical to canvass inputs and buy-in by all South Africans. We hope that this Parliament will also drive public consultations.
It is our considered view that this strategy, within the South African historical context, must unpack what we mean by national security, and we think that we should follow a broad human security approach. We must reach consensus on what we mean by national security. This strategy must deepen our national consensus around national security challenges – what are the threats? – and provide a long-term framework for their mitigation and management. It must also propose critical structures for the effective and integrated upholding of national security. It must highlight the important role of the citizens as owners and beneficiaries of national security.
The year 2013 marks the 50th Anniversary of the Organisation of African Unity, now called the African Union, AU. The AU has declared 2013 the year of Pan-Africanism and African Renaissance, in recognition of the need for Africa's citizens to promote unity, prosperity and peaceful coexistence on the continent. We take lessons from the 1963 "We must unite or perish" call by President Kwame Nkrumah, and I quote:
On this continent, it has not taken us long to discover that the struggle against colonialism does not end with the attainment of national independence.
Independence is only the prelude to a new and more involved struggle ... to conduct our own economic and social affairs, to construct our society according to our (own) aspirations, unhampered by the crushing and humiliating neo-colonial controls and interferences.
African unity is above all, a political kingdom which can only be gained by political means. Is it not unity alone that can weld us into an effective force, capable of creating our own progress and making our valuable contribution to world peace?
He went on to say:
In independent Africa, we are already re-experiencing the instability ... which (occurred) under colonial rule. The movement of the masses of the people of Africa for freedom from that kind of rule was not only a revolt against the conditions which it imposed. Our people supported us in our fight for independence because they believed that African governments could cure the ills of the past in a way which could never be accomplished under colonial rule.
If, therefore, now that we are independent we allow the same conditions that existed in colonial days to exist, all the resentment which overthrew colonialism will be mobilised against us.
I hope members note this. Global security remains stable but fragile due to pockets of conflict in some regions. One of the most noticeable trends in 2012 was the increase in the threat of terrorism in Africa.
In West Africa, the destabilising activities of extremist militant groups such as Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb, Boko Haram in Nigeria, and the Tuareg militia in Mali attest to this. In North Africa, the proliferation of small arms, and the availability of well-trained fighters, have weakened regional security structures. Al-Shabaab is determined to wage a jihad against countries that are part of the AU mission in Somalia.
Central Africa has experienced a resurgence of instability and conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC, and the Central African Republic, CAR. We are concerned about the deteriorating security and humanitarian situation in the CAR.
As a nation, we may not turn a blind eye on the evolving humanitarian crisis. The primary objective is to urgently restore security in order to allow inflows of humanitarian assistance and economic reconstruction. The most urgent task is the cantonment of the soldiers, that is, we must confine those rebels and soldiers to their barracks. We also need to screen them and integrate those who qualify into the national army. We must not allow the integration of child soldiers, foreign militia and those implicated in gross violations of human rights, such as rape and targeted murder.
We will work through the regional body, the Economic Community of Central African States, Eccas, the AU and the UN in assisting with the restoration of peace and constitutional normalcy in the CAR. An inclusive interim government is being established to restore legislative and judicial authorities, initiate national reconciliation, and ensure democratic elections within the next 18 months.
Despite all these challenges, Africa is on the rise from the shackles of poverty. Despite the threat of global recession, 6 out of 10 of the fastest growing economies are on this continent. Political stability and democratic change or renewal of government is steadily becoming the norm, as we have witnessed recently in Senegal, Lesotho, Angola and Kenya. Even in countries in North Africa, which were previously under autocratic rule, we have witnessed progress towards peace and democracy, with the holding of multiparty elections in Libya and Egypt. All these successes are critical contributors to peace and security on the continent.
We are intensifying our efforts in international collaboration in dealing with threats to global security such as terrorism, disasters and transnational crimes, including Internet crimes. In this regard, last year we attended the international meeting on High-Ranking Officials Responsible for Security Matters in St Petersburg, and we also attended the first Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, Brics, National Security Advisors ministerial meeting held in New Delhi in January 2013. The outcomes of these meetings have helped us to share experiences on common approaches in addressing threats such as piracy, terrorism and cybersecurity.
Our vision of a better Africa and a better world received greater impetus when we successfully hosted the 5th Brics Summit in Durban during March this year. As the current chair of the Brics National Security Advisor's Forum, the SSA is leading the process of hosting a similar meeting later this year.
In conclusion, we have just presented a synopsis of key strategic policy areas. Much more daily work is being done by the SSA to contribute to our national security, a peaceful Africa and a safer world. Now that restructuring is complete, we will focus on training and the development of modern technology platforms to assist with our national security. As I have mentioned, we will prioritise the finalisation of the National Security Strategy.
Let me thank all those who make my work easier. These include the President Mr Zuma, Deputy President Mr Motlanthe, and my colleagues in the Cabinet who give me their guidance; the leadership of the State Security Agency, led by Acting DG Dlomo; and the parliamentary committees processing our legislation, in the form of ad hoc committees.
Then there are our oversight structures, namely the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, chaired by the hon Burgess; the Inspector-General of Intelligence Adv Radebe; the Auditor-General Terence Nombembe and his team; Judge Mokgoro, who assists us in ensuring that we get legal intercepts; and other Chapter 9 institutions.
There are also my family and friends; the loyal and diligent ordinary members of the SSA who are not here with us now, but are working to ensure that we are all safe; and, lastly, the ANC, which tirelessly continues to lead South African society into prosperity. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr C V BURGESS
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Takes: 516 & 517
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY
Mr C V BURGESS: Chairperson, hon Minister of State Security, hon Ministers from the Security Cluster, hon members, hon members of the intelligence community, Inspector-General of Intelligence, Ambassador Adv Radebe and her delegation, Acting Director-General of State Security, Mr Dennis Dlomo and his delegation, Acting Head of the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, Chief of Defence Intelligence, General Nyembe, Judge Mokgoro, former Directors-General and Deputy Directors-General of Intelligence, and distinguished guests, I greet you.
We have present here today some of the most important people who work in our constitutional intelligence environment. They attend this Budget Vote debate as guests year after year. Why? Although this Budget Vote debate relates to the Minister of State Security and the State Security Agency, we have visitors from Defence Intelligence and all the intelligence oversight structures present. Year after year they attend as guests of the hon Minister. Why? It is because intelligence is a serious business, and the people that are present hold serious positions in our intelligence constitutional structures.
There is an incorrect and dangerous perception that intelligence entities and their connected activities are not desirable in a constitutional state that prides itself on a Bill of Rights such as ours. The argument, as I understand it, is that our Constitution demands accountability and transparency, and that secrecy is an infringement and a violation of a host of fundamental rights that are provided for in our Constitution.
However, these so-called experts and constitutional analysts must be reminded that the security services of the Republic of South Africa consist of the Defence Force, the SA Police Service and the civilian intelligence services. This is in terms of our Constitution. Furthermore, the Constitution specifically provides the authority for the establishment of the intelligence services. Accordingly, the power, the obligation and the authority to establish intelligence services are firmly entrenched in our Constitution. It is not a figment of the imagination.
These progressive perceptions that I have referred to, and their advocates, are lost in the misunderstanding of their own distorted perceptions. They choose to identify and accept only those constitutional provisions that further their own agenda.
But our Constitution also provides that national legislation must regulate the objects, powers and functions of the intelligence services. It is there – you'll find it in section 210 of the Constitution. We also have existing legislation. There is the Intelligence Services Act, Act 65 of 2002, the National Strategic Intelligence Act, Act 39 of 1994, and the Protection of State Information Bill.
I'm sorry to say, hon Chairperson, that when one mentions the Protection of State Information Bill it gives some people nightmares. [Interjections.] They start to have traumatic, very upsetting, extremely difficult and troublesome experiences. Hon members are reminded that only the other day the House passed the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill. The Bill merely provides for a few technical amendments to the existing pieces of intelligence legislation, which I have just mentioned. Some people opposed the Bill. They voted against it in the House. They voted against what the Constitution provides. Let me quote section 210 of the Constitution on the matter:
National legislation must regulate the objects, powers and functions of the intelligence services, including any intelligence division of the defence force or police service ...
That is what the Constitution states. That is what the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill is about. The legislation concerned was enacted in this Parliament during our democratic era. Suddenly, there is a problem with the legislation! How can you take people like that seriously? [Interjections.]
The hon Minister has announced that the new National Security Strategy is to be finalised in 2014. Again, it is the Constitution which provides, in section 198(d), and I quote: "National security is subject to the authority of Parliament and the national executive." Is it not the Constitution saying that? In section 198(c) it provides, and I quote again: "National security must be pursued in compliance with the law, including international law"?
What constitutes national security? [Interjections.] No, it is not a simple matter. It is not a simple matter, hon member. The Constitution envisages this difficulty and hence section 198 sets out the principles that should govern national security in the Republic. The announcement by the hon Minister of the new National Security Strategy must be welcomed, and I believe that the people of South Africa will soon be invited to participate in this initiative.
Just to emphasise the problem at hand, it is a fact that there is no single universally accepted definition of national security. Even though it is a concept that philosophers, security analysts and other experts have attempted to analyse over the centuries, there is no generally accepted view of what constitutes national security.
However, we are confronted by the realities of globalisation and the inherent threats that follow it. We observe, therefore, that all around the world countries and democratically elected governments are faced with increased threats of terrorism, espionage, cyber crimes and information peddling. These are but a few of the serious threats that we in South Africa also face. You heard what the Minister said on some of these threats.
We must not ponder or argue too long over what a national security strategy means in a democratic South Africa. What we do know is that no country in the world can ever tolerate or be soft on espionage and information peddling. Today cyber crime is the modern day weapon of mass destruction, used by criminals. I am merely highlighting the importance, and also the complexities of national security matters.
I now have to return to a very sensitive matter. As a responsible step and to comply with the constitutional provision which obliges government and Parliament to provide for the national security of the Republic of South Africa in accordance with the law, Parliament has now passed the Protection of State Information Bill. It is a security Bill; it is nothing more. It is directly related to national security and is protecting our national security. Is that not what we are mandated to do in terms of the Constitution?
Yes, Chairperson, now one can see that some of the hon members are having anxiety attacks again. The truth of the matter is that so-called experts and analysts, and a whole host of ill-advised and ill-informed individuals, have a mindset that gives negative and scandalous criticism only. Anything and everything is condemned! They are not prepared to have a constructive debate on the national security of our country, but when things go wrong they are the first to cry that intelligence has failed! How do you identify an intelligence failure if you do not even understand what intelligence entities do, how they work, and how national security relates to their work? They can only offer negative criticism – no disrespect meant.
Let me give the House an illustration of what I mean. An hon member of this House and a member the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, who should know better and should appreciate matters of intelligence and national security, made a media statement recently. [Interjections.] Yes, a media statement! He said in his statement, and I quote:
South Africa is increasingly moving towards a "secret state" mentality. The State Security Agency has invested more time and energy into legislation such as the Secrecy and Spy Bills than ensuring that they are appropriately ... managed.
[Interjections.] That is not true. The fact of the matter is that it's not true. Firstly, the State Security Agency does not make legislation – it is this Parliament that does. Then, I take it that the hon member of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence was referring to the Protection of State Information Bill and the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill when he spoke of the Secrecy Bill and the Spy Bill in his statement.
Is the hon member seriously suggesting that, notwithstanding the fact that the Constitution compels this Parliament to provide the necessary legislation to regulate the intelligence services, we should defy the Constitution? The Secrecy Bill and the Spy Bill, as the hon member calls them, were enacted precisely to give effect to the Constitution, and have been with us and passed by this democratic Parliament.
The General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill is nothing more than a technical Bill, and the hon Maynier knows it. It is a technical Bill and there is nothing new in it. This law exists. It was passed by this House. You find hon members opposing laws which this House has passed! [Interjections.]
On the question of national security, the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence is a statutory committee of Parliament. Serving on the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence is a serious matter, and it is taken as a serious matter. You need to be nominated by your party. You are appointed by the Speaker of the National Assembly or the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, as the case may be, acting with the concurrence of the President of the Republic of South Africa, who acts with the concurrence of the leader of your political party. You don't just pitch up at the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and say that you want to be there.
You have to conduct yourself in a manner that does not constitute a threat to national security. [Interjections.] You need security clearance, top-secret clearance, to serve on the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence. You need to take an oath of secrecy before a judge. In other words, you have to be a responsible and capable person to serve on the committee. [Interjections.] There is no time for political games on the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, for the work is monitoring the intelligence people who are intricately entrusted with protecting our national security.
Listen to this, hon members! On the committee itself we do not disclose ourselves as members of political parties. I have done it once in the time that I have been chair of this committee, and that was as a courtesy to the President when I introduced the hon members to him. We are simply members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence. All committee members – at least that is what I thought – understand the importance of the work that we do. It is about the security of our country!
The Intelligence Services Oversight Act, Act 40 of 1994, in fact provides that the committee must conduct its functions in a manner that is consistent with the protection of national security. Is that not so, hon members of the committee? So how is it that an hon member of this committee has gone public and stated, and I again quote from his statement:
The State Security Agency must make details of its budget known to the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence.
The hon member of this committee went further to say, and I quote again:
As a result of this budget being kept a secret, MPs are unable to properly monitor spending and ensure that irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure is minimized.
These statements are simply not true. That's the fact of the matter. They are not true, and the hon members here will tell you that. [Interjections.] Members of the JSCI will tell you that it's not true. So why would an hon member of this committee behave in this manner? This is a person whose political party, whose Parliament and the people of whose country have entrusted with the national security matters of our country! Why behave in this manner?
And the point is, some people simply do not want to contribute positively. When it comes to matters of intelligence and national security all is negative and confrontational. Let me put it to hon member of the committee: Have the ANC members of the committee ever behaved in such an irresponsible manner? Have the ANC members of the committee ever put party-political differences before matters of national security? [Interjections.]
You know, hon member, that when you raised the matter pertaining to the leader of your political party, I immediately called for an investigation, and you and the committee were briefed on that matter. You know that – nothing was hidden. [Interjections.]
On all the matters pertaining to our work – crime intelligence, matters relating to Gen Mdluli, the unfortunate tragedy in the Central African Republic, and others – we have been briefed.
These matters are all presently being dealt with by various institutions. Some are in court and before commissions, and are sub judice. Other matters are still under investigation and we as the JSCI will wait and act responsibly when we need to.
In line with the expected new National Security Strategy announced by the Minister, we must not underestimate the need to modernise and equip our Intelligence Services with the necessary tools to allow them to do their work effectively. Present-day technology and equipment are expensive, and can be rendered irrelevant and obsolete in a short time. This puts a strain on budgets. However, we as South Africans must determine our national security priorities and then fund them in a responsible manner. Our Intelligence Services have been complaining for years about their equipment and technology. We cannot allow the security of our country to be compromised due to underfunding.
For example, just in the area of lawful interceptions, the Office for Interception Centres, which deals with these matters, is confronted with ongoing challenges pertaining to capacity, technology and equipment. The JSCI therefore supports any initiative that is directed at upgrading the intelligence capacity, technology and equipment of the Interception Office and our intelligence services.
As we move towards developing a National Security Strategy, it is important that we do not lose sight of the coordination of our intelligence services. This, too, is a constitutional obligation and an extremely important one. The JSCI is pleased to report that the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, Nicoc, has been performing well. This has been an area of concern in the past, but the committee will continue to monitor and give support to Nicoc so that our people get the full benefit of the resources.
Allow me to thank those hon members that serve on the committee, and also the hon Minister, who has worked very hard in trying to bring in the necessary legislation that is needed to regulate the civilian intelligence services.
Let me also thank the inspector-general, who has always been a pillar of strength in our oversight structures – always willing to assist the committee when needed, and always willing to come to brief the committee.
I thank the Acting Director-General of State Security, who himself has been very helpful and always willing to assist, the generals from Crime Intelligence, and the Acting-General of Defence Intelligence. On behalf of the committee, I want to thank you for the very kind co-operation that you have given in working with the committee.
To all the other intelligence officers in the intelligence community, we – or certainly some of us on the JSCI – are very aware of the work that you put into this and the serious stress that this puts upon you, given the nature of the work. It's all very well that when something goes wrong, the first line of attack is to look at our intelligence structures and to complain. However, they work in very trying structures, and they work under very difficult circumstances. They work with a mandate – they don't just work and do what they want. There are intelligence priorities.
I think, hon members, you must acquaint yourselves with these matters before you start to criticise. These people haven't come here today to allow you to throw stones at them. These are serious people sitting here. You don't see them very often, and it is not nice when people like this, who work in such a serious community, come here and you throw stones. I encourage hon members that have stones that they intend to throw, to keep them for another time. [Interjections.] Yes, throw them at me! Otherwise, be kind and thank the people for what they are doing.
To the staff of the committee, thank you very much for the assistance. I know you work under very trying circumstances – we are short-staffed as things stand, and we have been saddled with a lot of work. [Interjections.] There is a lot that has been happening in the community and we just hope that we as a committee will get support from Parliament and support from the structures, as we have been getting in the past. Thank you, hon Chairperson. [Applause.]
Mr D J STUBBE
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 518
Mr C V BURGESS
Afrikaans:
Mnr D J STUBBE: Agb Voorsitter, Minister, agb lede, alle lede van die intelligensiegemeenskap en gaste, die einde van die Vierde Parlement is in sig. Die afgelope jaar is veral gekenmerk deur nuwe wetgewing van toepassing op die intelligensiegemeenskap. Dit is egter duidelik dat die wetgewing ten doel het om bestaande wetgewing sodanig te reguleer wat deursigtigheid beperk.
Dit is aanvaarbaar dat gebeure elders in die wêreld waar die veiligheid van die staat en sy inwoners bedreig word verskerpte sekerheidskontroles en optredes regverdig en dat hersiening van wetgewing voor die hand liggend is.
In die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks is daar twee stukke wetgewing voorgestel wat doelbewus vrae laat ontstaan. Dit is die Protection of State Information Bill met drakoniese voorstelle en veranderinge, asook die Algemene Wysigingswet op Intelligensiewette, wat veronderstel was om, volgens die Minister, slegs tegniese veranderinge te weeg te bring. As daar egter vanaf 'n politieke oogpunt na laasgenoemde wetgewing gekyk word, blyk dit dat beginsels, soos vervat in die Witskrif oor Intelligensie van 1995, nie meer geld nie.
Die Witskrif fokus op die totstandkoming van 'n nuwe doktrine waar daar weg beweeg word van 'n militêr-strategiese benadering na 'n nuwe burgerlike diens – binnelands sowel as buitelands – en word daar slegs op 'n indirekte wyse na militêre sowel as kriminele intelligensie verwys. Met verwysing na die samestelling van die intelligensiegemeenskap word daar soos volg aangehaal uit die Witskrif.
English:
After the amalgamation of the various intelligence formations:
(such arrangements) will lead to the eventual establishment of two civilian intelligence agencies, one focusing on domestic intelligence (and retaining the name National Intelligence Agency (Nia)) and a service focusing on foreign intelligence (to be named the South African Secret Service (Sass)).
The mission of the domestic intelligence service (the National Intelligence Agency) will be to conduct security intelligence within the borders of the Republic of South Africa in order to protect the Constitution. The overall aim shall be to ensure the security and stability of the State and the safety and wellbeing of its citizens.
The mission of the foreign intelligence service (the South African Secret Service) will be to conduct intelligence in relation to external threats, opportunities and other issues that may affect the Republic of South Africa, with the aim of promoting the national security and the interests of the country and its citizens.
The most significant departure from the old dispensation is that instead of one centralised national civilian intelligence organisation, there will be two. This arrangement will not only ensure that the new intelligence dispensation in South Africa corresponds with general international trends, but will (also) promote greater focusing, effectiveness, professionalism and expertise in the specialised fields of domestic and foreign intelligence.
In outlining the function, control and mandate of the new security services, the White Paper emphasises democratic principles and the centrality of the Constitution. Certain key principles are set out to ensure meaningful government control over the intelligence community. Essentially, the White Paper clearly established a decentralised national intelligence structure.
If we look at the evolution in the intelligence sphere prior to the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill, Gilab, it is interesting to note that every Minister designated to assume political responsibility for the intelligence services sought amendments to the national legislation in order to further expand their authority over the intelligence services. This is in line with the statement in the White Paper referring to the concept of international trends.
However, except for the reference in the Constitution to a multiparty parliamentary committee that has oversight, a body to co-ordinate intelligence, and an inspector, no mention is made either in the Constitution or in the White Paper of the existence of entities such as the Intelligence Academy, Electronic Communications Security (Pty) Ltd, Comsec, or the National Communications Centre, NCC. The said entities exist, however, but fall under the jurisdiction of Nia.
With the introduction of the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill, there is a definite shift from the prescriptions referred to in the White Paper – back to the colonial system, Minister.
Afrikaans:
Die nuwe Wysigingswetsontwerp op Algemene Intelligensiewetgewing, ingevolge 'n proklamasie deur die President in 2009, het hoofsaaklik ten doel om die vormalige Nia, Sass en ander entiteite, waaronder die akademie, Comsec en die Nasionale Kommunikasiesentrum, NKS, saam te snoer as die Staatsveiligheidsagentskap. Dit het tot gevolg dat wysigings aangebring is, aan, onder andere, die Wet op Nasionale Strategiese Intelligensie van 1994, die Wet op Toesig oor Intelligensiedienste, Wet 40 van 1994, asook die Wet op Intelligensiedienste, Wet 65 van 2002, terwyl die Wet op Electronic Communications Security (Pty) Ltd, Wet 68 van 2002, in geheel opgeskort is.
'n Verdere uitvloeisel van die wysigingswetsontwerp het tot gevolg dat daar dringend gekyk moet word na die bepalings van die Wet op Toesig oor Intelligensiedienste, Wet 40 van 1994 deur die Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Intelligensie, GSKI. Aangesien alle entiteite wat vroeër afsonderlik onderwerp was aan parlementêre oorsig nou opgeneem is in die SVA, moet die oorsigrol dus hergedefinieer word.
Die GSKI se oorsigrol word verder bemoeilik omdat sperdatums vir sertifikate deur die Inspekteur-Generaal asook die Ouditeur-Generaal nie betyds ontvang word nie en daar dus nie volledig verslag aan die Parlement gegee word nie. Die begroting van die kantoor van die Minister is ook verskans in die begroting van die SVA, wat dit onmoontlik maak om te bepaal of sy begroting oor- of onderspandeer is. Die uitsprake dat die instelling van die SVA 'n wesentlike besparing op die begroting gaan meebring kan ook nie gemeet word nie vanwee die kompleksiteit van die entiteit.
Het die tyd nie dalk aangebreek dat die modelle wat tans gebruik word soos, by voorbeeld, die samestelling van die GSKI teenoor 'n staande komitee, die bevoegdhede van die Inspekteur-Generaal, en die hele oorsigwetgewing, oordink moet word nie? Tans is die GSKI ingestel om reaktief aandag te skenk aan probleme wat in die intelligensiegemeenskap ontstaan, pleks daarvan om voorkennis te gebruik alvorens 'n probleem opduik.
English:
Three issues that come to mind are the following. Firstly, there is the Gupta invasion of the Waterkloof Air Force Base with its status as a national key point. Had this happened elsewhere in the world, such an aircraft would have been shot down if no preflight clearance had been given – and there is ambiguity about whether such clearance was given or not. This is a poor reflection on the readiness of our security services.
In the second case, reports were received only yesterday that the international terrorist group, Al-Qaeda, has been operating training bases under our noses without any intervention from our security establishment.
The third issue is the fact that intelligence information regarding the tragic deaths of South African troops in the Central African Republic was appalling. I can recall that two weeks ago, during the debate when we were voting on the Protection of State Information Bill, the hon Landers looked up at the gallery and proclaimed that spies were walking in the passages of Parliament. I just wonder if their presence here might perhaps be to gather prior knowledge and act as an early warning system, instead of trying to do damage control after an incident has occurred.
The Minister is no doubt aware that there has been speculation in the media, claiming that the Minister intervened to stop legal or illegal investigation by the SSA into the undue influence of the Guptas. Will the Minister tell us whether this is true? A simple yes or no will do. I thank you. [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order! [Interjections.] Hon member, I have not recognised you! [Interjections.] Order!
Mr N J J KOORNHOF
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 519
Mr D J STUBBE
Mr N J J KOORNHOF: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon members, as you know, I'm not a member of this committee, and so I have the liberty to speak more freely!
I want to be more philosophical today, and start off by telling you a story of the young Philippine woman, Lucinda David, who is a fantastic debater. In a speech to explain the value of debating, she states that so many times when we are debating issues, we talk past each other or just agree to be politically correct.
Then she goes on to share the story of when she went to one of the war-stricken provinces of the Philippines. The lights went out in the hall where she was speaking. Some of the soldiers came up to the stage. She was scared, but then one said to her, "Today you have taught us that it is more powerful to fight with words – we have left our guns outside." Believe me, I have left my guns outside today! However, for the sake of the debate I need to say a few words.
State security can never be compromised to favour anyone, and should never allow individuals to think that they can rely on the forces of intelligence to protect them when they become corrupt and powerful. That is why the late Joe Matthews found in 2008 – with good reason then, and nothing is new in this business – that state institutions were being abused, and therefore recommended steps to be taken to ensure that those in the employment of the state did not act to promote any party, any individual or any faction.
The sad part is that we know now that this report was roundly ignored and today it has still been possible, through the well-planned infiltration of domestic intelligence, for recent events to set the scene for instability, to the ultimate detriment of democracy and service delivery. No one should ever have the power to manipulate the levers of power on the level of intelligence in such a way as to compromise the impartiality of state intelligence.
Ranjeni Munusamy wrote about the Gupta brothers in the Daily Maverick. I'm sorry to mention their names, but unfortunately I have to. She said, and I quote:
"How could this have happened?" The answer is rooted in debacle in the Department of State Security two years ago, ... –
it was mentioned by the hon Stubbe –
... when the former intelligence heads tried to warn government that the Gupta brothers posed a possible threat to national security. But their investigation was stymied, leading to them losing their jobs.
Maybe the Minister can tell us more about this incident. Was there a systematic attempt not to use state security and intelligence to protect the interests of the country against the undue influence of individuals? This country can never become a commodity of a group of individuals or a company that through well-connected relationships freely use their influence to subvert the country's clear rules.
We have seen this happening too many times in world history and in our own history. You see the regimes that have allowed this to happen, where eventually people will use power and the manipulation of intelligence to remain in power. But, if you allow it to happen too many times, this behaviour by the state seems almost to be normal and, as we see from reactions, it becomes acceptable, and the ordinary good official or civil servant stops challenging it. Then those who have been witnessing a wrong and not stopping individuals who subvert the rules of the country are as guilty as those who have ordered it.
Moloto Mothapo, the ANC parliamentary spokesperson, wrote in his defence of the passing of the Protection of State Information Bill, and I quote:
Every constitutional democracy in the world has a moral and constitutional obligation to keep certain information secret for the protection of its people and its democracy.
That is true, but that can only be the case when there are no forces compromising state security and in fact doing, without a challenge, what others do not think is even possible or correct. That is why Gitta Sereny warned us in her book when she wrote:
What Hitler taught us, to an extent greater than anyone else in history, though we would become aware of it again in Vietnam, we would have become aware of it again in apartheid South Africa, is that a licence to kill or a licence to do what you want creates a momentum which defies moral sensibility and discernment, and destroys the capacity of the individual to distinguish between good and evil, or, and this is perhaps even worse, to act against a recognised wrong.
Hon Minister, it's your duty to make sure that this does not happen and you must be seen to act decisively against those institutions that misuse the undue influence they have wrongly acquired. The Guptas are part of those and you cannot be ignorant about their doings. They brought this country to the brink of being a banana republic. I assume that your department had the intelligence and could have saved us and them from this embarrassment. The question remains: Why were they not stopped? Only you can answer that. I thank you. [Applause.]
Prof C T MSIMANG
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 520
Mr N J J KOORNHOF
Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon Chairperson, Thomas Jefferson once said, "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
This debate on the Budget Vote of State Security is taking place at a critical time and juncture in the history of our country. This time is marked by events which threaten that very state security and stability.
Reference can be made here to the tragedy that occurred at the Marikana mine in 2012, which claimed the lives of 34 miners who were demonstrating for higher wages and were allegedly mowed down by the Police Service. While the nation is still recovering from the aftermath of that terrible incident, and trying to find answers to same, we hear of the assassination of a number of Marikana witnesses who were set to testify before the Farlam Commission.
We also have politically well-connected state cronies landing aeroplanes from India at our military bases in order to attend certain Gupta family nuptials at Sun City! This kind of breach of security protocol is unprecedented in our country.
Then, we can add the fact that we are host to no less than three training facilities for al-Qaeda terrorists here in South Africa! [Interjections.]
I think we can all agree that the above warrant a very stable and well-functioning Department of State Security. Yet this is unfortunately far from true. Take the Head of Crime Intelligence for instance. He was recalled under a cloud of allegations, including his recruitment of members of his own family as undercover agents. If these allegations are true, one might question whether such people were appointed on the basis of merit, or whether it was a case of favouritism.
Even more disconcerting is the fact that the vacancy left by Lt Gen Richard Mdluli has been filled by an "acting" official. A number of portfolio committees in this Parliament have expressed their disgust at this government which has been turned into "Hollywood" with so many senior officials "acting" in senior positions.
The department itself does not inspire confidence when it comes to stability. This department has been in the throes of reconstruction for almost three years now. Reconstruction and mergers often bring fear and insecurity in their wake. Members of staff are continuously in fear of losing their jobs or rank, and this does not augur well for stability. One only hopes that the mergers will soon be completed. It was nice, hon Minister, to hear you updating this House on the progress made in this regard.
Another grave concern is the draining of expertise and experience from this department. One was particularly alarmed by the resignation of senior directors, including Gen Gibson Njenje, head of State Security; Moe Shaik, head of Foreign Intelligence; and Jeff Maqetuka, a director-general at the agency, almost all at the same time. Their positions remain filled by acting personnel.
Yet another cause of instability is the porosity of our borders. It was hoped that the establishment of the Border Management Agency would curb the illegal entry of immigrants from the African states. Many such foreigners proceed to settle in our informal settlements, where the most enterprising among them, especially those from Somalia, open shops which exploit the locals, and then this leads to xenophobic attacks and killings. This illegal entry is a ticking time bomb. The porosity of our borders must be attended to urgently.
In conclusion, in spite of all the above the IFP will support this Budget Vote in the hope that it will be used to bring about stability in our country. We are in dire need of same. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mrs S T WILLIAMS-DE BRUYN
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 521
Prof C T MSIMANG
Mrs S T WILLIAMS-DE BRUYN: Chairperson, Minister of State Security, Ministers and Deputy Ministers present, chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, hon members, Acting Director-General of the State Security Agency, Inspector-General of Intelligence, distinguished guests, members of the intelligence community, intelligence veterans, and fellow South Africans, here I stand today, to say that I care, and that I support the Budget Vote of our Minister of State Security.
It is an undeniable fact that since the amalgamation of the erstwhile former intelligence services into the civilian intelligence community, particularly the National Intelligence Agency and the South African Secret Service, there has been a disturbing duplication of resources on the corporate side, and a lack of effective intelligence co-ordination and integration on the operational side.
We have seen one Minister after another grapple with the problem of downmanagement of costs. The current restructuring initiative seems to be addressing the long-standing problems, which were identified a long time ago but needed political muscle to be commenced with and brought to a head.
It is also necessary to make mention of the speech that President Jacob Zuma delivered at the National Intelligence Service Day celebrations at Musanda on 10 April 2012, in which he noted:
The restructuring (of the civilian intelligence community) was informed by the desire to improve the capacity and quality of intelligence in a radically changing global environment.
You see, hon members, what our President was alluding to was the fact that our world is increasingly being besieged by new threats that require a response from the intelligence services in order to mitigate and thwart them. Today we see the collapse of economies, which poses states and regional blocks against one other. The situation in the Eurozone and Asia bears testimony to this development. Questions are being raised as to whether these crises are manipulated or are a result of dark forces pulling strings to hurt the economies. Questions will always be asked about the readiness of intelligence to meet these challenges.
On the domestic front we have witnessed upheavals in the streets of our cities, which in many instances turn into violence and destruction, and this leaves the authorities unprepared to handle them. We trust the agency will pay attention to this phenomenon and supply early warning so as to avert a situation where these actions turn violent.
I stand here and support the Budget Vote, and I would like to remind hon members that the Department of State Security is seized with the objective of supporting government in order for it to achieve the outcome of ensuring that the department cares. That means all people in the Republic of South Africa should be safe, and should feel safe at all times, and that the Department of State Security should create a better South Africa and contribute to a better and safer Africa and the world. It is in line with the constitutional imperative of the collective pursuit of national security, which is integral to the primary constitutional objective of establishing a constitutional state based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights.
Chapter 11 of our Constitution recognises the importance of national security, and to that end contains principles and provisions that govern the national security of the Republic. I would like to indicate that the process that was embarked on by the Minister of State Security, in reviewing and restructuring the intelligence architecture in order to ensure that we have a professional and efficient state security machinery, led to the progress made by the Minister of State Security in the quest to establish a well-oiled civilian intelligence service with effective and efficient discharge of its mandate. The key consideration was to look at areas where there was duplication and where there were stovepipes, and to ensure the sharing of scarce resources within the intelligence community.
The restructuring initiative by the Minister has given effect to the following measures. They are, firstly, a shift in focus from management to creating professionalism by capacitating the core business of the State Security Department. Then there are alignment and consolidation of the policies of the State Security Department, instead of having separate policies for Nia and Sass.
The State Security Agency restructuring process was guided by its Director-General, Mr Dennis T Dlomo, and management and, with the support of the Minister of State Security, Dr Cwele, developed an identity of "I care". Chairperson, please allow me, for the benefit of the House, to indicate the meaning of "I care". The letter "I" stands for "integrity". "C" is for "commitment, competence and collaboration". "A" is for "accountability". "R" is for "reliability, responsibility, and responsiveness", and "E" for "excellence".
There is also the creation of a unifying organisational culture of quarterly tribal assemblies within the State Security Agency at headquarters and in the provinces, to cultivate loyalty and national pride among members and to serve as a reminder to our intelligence officers of our allegiance to the Constitution of our country.
Furthermore, the Intelligence Academy, through the restructuring process, has commenced with an intake of State Security Agency core and noncore members for training in various intelligence core business.
Then there is the intake of cadets within the State Security Agency for basic training, in order to have a pool of well-trained and qualified members.
Finally, there is the creation of a State Security Veterans Association in line with applicable departmental regulations.
Our Constitution brings about a culture of good governance across all spheres of government in our country. The security services are not immune from this constitutional injunction. Good governance is also part of our service delivery ethic, and therefore our services have to be rendered accountable by our oversight mechanisms. In this regard, our intelligence services are overseen by the parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, JSCI, and the office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence. This is to assure the public that our intelligence services act within the rule of law, with probity and respect for human rights, as entrenched in Chapter 2 of our Constitution.
In closure, I am happy that through the Minister's restructuring process the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill has already gone through the process of parliamentary legislative stages and will soon become law. These enabling provisions will ensure that the State Security Agency is on a sound legislative footing as an intelligence service.
The Bill, once enacted, will disestablish Sass and Nia, and in their stead confer the domestic, foreign and signals intelligence mandate on the State Security Agency. This is a constructive development which will bring about a co-ordinated and integrated intelligence collection, production and dissemination effort in the quest to create a decision advantage for policy makers in line with the constitutional imperatives of intelligence as a co-ordinated activity.
This development in the civilian intelligence community does accord with global trends which favour a new integrated and co-ordinated intelligence enterprise, with emphasis on customer orientation. This, hon Chairperson, members of the House and distinguished guests, was what President JG Zuma alluded to in his address on National Intelligence Service Day, when he said:
(Our) democratic State led by the African National Congress, will never undertake any activity or pass any law that undermines the security of the South African people, or which violates their Constitutional rights.
It is against this background that the ANC supports the Budget Vote of the Minister of State Security, Dr S C Cwele. Malibongwe igama lamakhosikazi! [Let the name of the women be praised!]
HON MEMBERS: Malibongwe! [Let them be praised!]
Mrs S T WILLIAMS-DE BRUYN: I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr N M KGANYAGO
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 522
Mrs S T WILLIAMS-DE BRUYN
Mr N M KGANYAGO: Minister, Deputy Ministers and hon members, gone are the days when state security was employed to serve the interests of a minority group that viewed the majority of the citizens of this country as a threat to their security. We all know that. [Applause.] However, in the past few weeks an incident which severely undermined our national security occurred. Here I am referring to the controversial use of Waterkloof military air base to land private planes for the wedding guests of the Gupta family. [Interjections.] Add to this the claims that state officials were bullied by this family when these violations of our laws occurred. In my language we say, ...
Sepedi:
... ntlo lerole ga e tswale kgoši.
English:
Government, and State Security in particular, are duty-bound to take decisive action on this matter and to make it clear to all and sundry that our state security is not for sale. This is important for State Security ... [Interjections.] Yes, I think you have a problem. [Laughter.] This is important for State Security in redeeming the department's image, however intense the political pressures of the day. [Interjections.] You believe in the microphone and not in your ears! [Laughter.]
Another important matter requiring urgent attention under State Security relates to the Speaker's controversial decision to have the Department of Public Works task team report on Nkandla discussed by the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence behind closed doors. The UDM is completely opposed to this decision. We believe that instead of blacking out the entire report and keeping it from the public, only the sections of the report that have the potential to jeopardise the security of the President should not be made public.
This is because, like our sister opposition parties, we believe that the decision not to make the report public is an attempt to ensure that the public never gets to know what really went wrong in the Nkandlagate scandal, and once that occurs ... [Inaudible.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Prof L B G Ndabandaba): Order, hon Kganyago! Your time has expired.
Mr N M KGANYAGO: Just a last ... [Inaudible.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Prof L B G Ndabandaba): Your time has expired!
Mr N M KGANYAGO: Minister, thank you very much for speeding up the restructuring process. I support the Budget Vote. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 522
Mr N M KGANYAGO
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson and hon Minister, I too would like to thank all those hardworking officials and members of oversight bodies that have done an exceptional job over the past year. I thank them for being here today.
In this debate, on behalf of the ACDP I would like to focus on the balance between national security considerations on the one hand – the need for secrecy – and the need for openness and accountability, as Mr Burgess said in opening the debate on this issue.
Clearly, open and transparent government and the free flow of information concerning the affairs of the state is the lifeblood of democracy. Let us be reminded of what the Supreme Court of Appeal said in 2010 when it confirmed that the state must justify secrecy when it seeks to rely on legislation denying access to information on the grounds of secrecy. We are not opposed to secrecy, but the state must justify it – objectively justiciable justification.
We share concerns that have been expressed about the abuse of secrecy when it comes to the Guptas and other issues. Of course, the main reason why it must be justifiable is to avoid political abuse, which has been referred to by previous speakers.
Now let us consider the issue of the Nkandla report. This raises significant constitutional and legal issues. The central issue is: To what degree does the Promotion of Access to Information Act trump the provisions of the National Key Points Act, given that Nkandla has now been declared a national key point? Is it legally correct that an application by the Mail & Guardian, under the Promotion of Access to Information Act, for all documents that show evidence of the financial implications of this project, should be refused in totality? This is despite the request for information disavowing any entitlement to secret security-sensitive information. The state's response has been a blanket refusal, and clearly this cannot be correct.
Firstly, one must ask whether national security considerations are not overridden by section 46 of the Promotion of Access to Information Act which is a unique provision worldwide, and was included in South Africa because of our past. It provides that where disclosure reveals a substantial contravention of the law, or a failure to comply with the law, even where it relates to national security, the information must be furnished.
We know the internal task team has already investigated and found irregularities. In my view and the view of the ACDP, the trumping section 46 of the Promotion of Access to Information Act applies here and the information should be provided. It is clearly in the public interest to do so.
We also believe that section 5 of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, which is a trumping clause, is applicable. It states that it:
... applies to the exclusion of any provision of other legislation that-
(a) prohibits ... the disclosure of a record of a public body or private body ...
This clearly trumps the National Key Points Act. Once again, that information should be provided and we look forward, at the end of the day, to the court's deciding on this. Thank you very much. [Time expired.][Applause.]
Ms S C N SITHOLE
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 523
Mr S N SWART
Ms S C N SITHOLE: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister of State Security, Dr Cwele, hon members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, and my beloved security community, you who work tirelessly to protect the people of South Africa without much acknowledgement, I salute you.
The ANC has ordered me to come and support this budget, and that is exactly what I'm doing now. [Interjections.] The reason why the ANC supports the budget is that we in the ANC are going to monitor the use of these state resources, because the money belongs to the people of South Africa and the ANC loves the people of South Africa. That is the reason. [Interjections.]
Xitsonga:
N'wina va ka hina lava nga emakaya, ndza mi losa. Ndza khensa ku va mi ndzi yingisela namuntlha. Ndzi ya bula na n'wina hi timhaka ta nkoka swinene: Timhaka ta vuhlayiseki bya hina. Mi fanele ku ndzi yingisela hi vutlhari lebyikulu. Mi nga yengiwi hi vanhu lava nga tiviki lexi va xi vulavulaka.
Vunhlori a hi ku dya vuswa, i mhaka ya ku fa na ku hanya. Loko hi vulavula hi vuhlayiseki, hi fanele hi tirhisa miehleketo ya hina. Ndzi lava ku mi tsundzuxa mhaka yin'wana loko munhu a vulavula hi vuhlayiseki a nga ri na vukheta. Eka tikhomphyuta na tiqingho ta n'wina ku na xilo lexi va nge i inthanete. Fambani mi ya tsala leswi landzelaka, www.google.com. Tsalani vito ra munhu, xivongo na vandla leri a yimelaka rona. Mi tsala na ndhawu ya yena yo velekiwa kumbe vuakatiko bya yena. Mi ta kuma ntiyiso. Inthanete a yi na mavondzo, yi ta mi byela laha xinkavana xa munhu yaloye xi nga wela kona. Mi ta twisisa leswaku hikokwalaho ka yini a nga ri na mhaka na leswi a swi vulavulaka hi tiko leri.
Mina na n'wina hi na ntiyiso leswaku swinkavana swa hina swi wele kwala. Nakambe marhambu ya hina ya ta bolela kwala ka tiko leri. Lavan'wana a hi na ntiyiso wa vona. A hi tlhariheni va ka hina. Hi nga xisiwi hi lava va nga ta laha ku ta endla mali.
Ku na ndzavisiso wa tibangi ta le USA lowu nga kombisa leswaku tiko ra hina hi rona ri nga na swicelwa swo tala exikarhi ka matiko hinkwayo ya misava loko ya hlanganile. Hikwalaho, tsundzukani kahle leswaku vanhu lava vulaka leswaku hinkwaswo swilo swa hina hi fanele hi swi veka swi ku tlanganda erivaleni, va lava ku tiva timhaka ta nsuku hinkwawo lowu hi nga na wona.
Nakambe lavisisani leswaku loko ku lweriwa ntshuxeko munhu loyi a ri kwihi ke? Loko kuri leswaku a nga ri kona, mi nga onhi nkarhi wa n'wina hi ku n'wi yingisela.
English:
We in the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence expect the accounting authority and the accounting officer to monitor very passionately the implementation of programmes and projects for effective and efficient state delivery. Proper programme and project management is important for value creation in any organisation, be it private or public, even if it is a church. Good corporate governance demands sound financial and operational control over management of programmes and projects.
I do fully appreciate the fact that the intelligence services worldwide face a bigger challenge, of the wide scope of national security, which focuses on more than just the military wellbeing of the state, and also has to assist government in the analysis of soft security issues. The hard security issues are becoming transnational in nature and require more co-ordination and more resources to tackle.
It needs to be stressed that the intelligence structures require a strong budget that will do the following. First, it will empower them to protect our territorial borders, integrity and sovereignty. Secondly, it will match the determination of organised criminals. Thirdly, it will match the determination of those who are hellbent on destabilising our domestic security and that of the continent.
In addition to monitoring whether the agency is spending in line with annual performance plans and targets approved by the Minister, the committee has the responsibility to monitor whether the agency is assisting in fighting corruption in the country, as corruption is not occurring only in the public sector, but in every walk of life. For example, there is a church leader who is currently under investigation for corrupt practices.
Director-general, you are the person I want to talk to today. I say that this budget needs to be spent wisely, starting with the streamlining of functions and structures. We will need to do the following. In fact, if you really need our support as a committee, DG, you will need to do the following.
Firstly, report to the JSCI at least four times a year, and on time!
Secondly, at all times remember that although the Public Finance Management Act allows you to delegate, the accountability and responsibility remain with you. As I indicated to you at your last appearance, DG, no other person is responsible for this budget – it is you only. If there are other people involved, that is your baby. You have to look after this money in a manner that is compliant with the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999.
Thirdly, you have to correct all the shortcomings that we have indicated to you.
Fourthly, you have to ensure that the recommendations of the Auditor-General are addressed. I do not want to see the same recommendations over and over and over again.
Fifthly, you must "make assurance double sure", as Shakespeare wrote in Macbeth – there are consequences for wrongdoing if there is any such finding by the Auditor-General.
Sixthly, you must tighten financial control by ensuring that the internal audit system and risk control are working properly. Take the recommendations of your audit committee seriously. If you do not have them, make sure you have them by tomorrow. Guarantee its independence, because that will work for you.
Finally, if you receive this allocation and you do not do what I have advised you, DG, I will influence the committee to recommend to the Minister that he most humbly relieve you of your responsibility! [Laughter.] Don't listen to the newspapers, but adhere to the Public Finance Management Act. [Interjections.] Don't listen to the back-seat drivers on my left! [Laughter.] Listen to the Intelligence Services Oversight Act. More than that, also listen to your own conscience, and your loyalty to your own country, South Africa. [Interjections.]
Your responsibility is to protect and defend the hard-won freedom of our land, the freedom that many spent all their lives fighting for. This is the freedom that Ruth First, Bram Fischer, Chris Hani, Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu, Mama Mittah Seperepere, Mark Shope, Winnie Mandela, Ruth Mompati, Adelaide Tambo, Nelson Mandela and Sheila Weinberg, to name just a few, spent all their lives fighting for. Use this budget to protect the citizens of South Africa. Never ever listen to the back-seat drivers on your left. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr T W COETZEE
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 524
Ms S C N SITHOLE
Mr T W COETZEE: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister of State Security, other Ministers present, hon chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, hon members, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, and my beloved wife, Magda, in the public gallery, whom I would like to acknowledge for her presence, support and love, I greet you all. [Applause.] Thank you.
Mr Chairperson, as we all know, the Vote of State Security is classified information, but I would like to take the opportunity to remind the hon Minister of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act, Act 40 of 1994, which provides, amongst others, that the JSCI has the function of oversight over the Minister of State Security. However, the Minister has not tabled his office budget before the JSCI since he became the Minister of State Security. Then we talk about standards, laws and bylaws! [Interjections.]
Certainly one of the most sensational cases is the Mdluli saga. Just last week, on Friday, 10 May, the Mail & Guardian reported this under the headline, "How top cop Lazarus 'plundered' spy fund", and it should be noted that charges against Mdluli were dropped:
Suspended crime intelligence boss Richard Mdluli and (his) financial officer, Solly Lazarus, allegedly used the division's secret service account as a piggy bank to splash out on trips to China and Mauritius ...
[Interjections.] In case Mr Burgess doesn't know this:
The account is a covert fund ..."
An HON MEMBER: Do you know different? Do you know the truth?
Mr T W COETZEE: Yes. You don't know it. [Interjections.]
(It was) used to finance undercover crime-intelligence operations. Both Mdluli and Lazarus ...
[Interjections.]
The TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (Prof L B G Ndabandaba): Order! Order, hon members!
Mr T W COETZEE: I continue:
Both Mdluli and Lazarus were suspended from crime intelligence in 2011 after allegations of fraud and corruption linked to the secret fund.
[Interjections.] The Minister of State Security said in his budget speech on 1 July 2009, and I quote: "(I) will unfailingly ensure that the powers and public funds entrusted to us are used responsibly."
Are they? It doesn't look like it.
In response to this let me say that the hon Minister will recall the following, and if he doesn't I will remind him. Last year I challenged him during our budget debate to call on the Auditor-General to table a full report to the JSCI on the spending of all secret funds within the intelligence domain over the last five years.
An HON MEMBER: Where is the report?
Mr T W COETZEE: He has probably, with due respect, conveniently forgotten about it. Or was it done on purpose?
Afrikaans:
Die jaarlikse verslag van die JSCI [Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Intelligensie.] is die enigste werklike dokument vir kommunikasie tussen die JSCI en die publiek daar buite. Ek praat al reeds vir die afgelope vier jaar oor uitstaande verslae wat nie ter tafel gelê word nie. Klaarblyklik is dit net die DA wat hieroor bekommerd is, want dit pla nie die voorsitter of die Minister nie. Hulle is klaarblylik kop in een mus met die President.
Vir rekord doeleindes wil ek noem dat geen verslag voor 2004 gevind kan word nie. Vir die afgelope agt jaar is slegs vier verslae ter tafel gelê, waarvan die laaste twee van 2010-11 en 2011-12 nog by die President lê. Ons doen niks daaromtrent nie! 'n Volgende punt is dat ...
English:
... the vetting process remains an ongoing concern. The impression is created that the Minister of State Security is not concerned, and that he doesn't have the political will to address this problem.
An HON MEMBER: You think so?
Mr T W COETZEE: Yes, it's a fact. [Laughter.] Take Mdluli as an example, man.
An HON MEMBER: Where are the reports?
Mr T W COETZEE: Take yourself! [Interjections.] I would like to remind the hon Minister of his commitment in this regard in his speech of 1 July 2009, when he said:
We will continue to secure the full implementation of all elements of our Vetting Strategy, which contributes to enabling government to expose and root out criminals from the public service.
An HON MEMBER: Who are you?
Mr T W COETZEE: We are not doing it, Mr Minister! We are not doing it! Notwithstanding the fact that the Minister announced in October 2009 that the restructuring of the intelligence service would be done, ... [Interjections.] ... and would be one of his key priorities, it's still not completed.
An HON MEMBER: Why are you shaking?
Mr T W COETZEE: It also seems as if the Guptas had a big influence on, or shall I rather say, caused a big disruption in, the restructuring process. [Laughter.] The Daily News reported on 6 May, under the headline, "Spooks warned of Gupta influence", and I quote:
A persistent question following the Gupta jet being allowed to land at Waterkloof ... is: "How could this have happened?"
The answer is rooted ... –
and you must listen, Mr Minister, because you gave me an answer to this question a year or so ago –
The answer is rooted in a debacle in the Department of State Security two years ago, when the former intelligence heads tried to warn the government that the Gupta brothers posed a possible threat to national security.
But their investigation was (stopped), ... –
was stopped! [Interjections.] –
... and as a result they lost their jobs.
[Interjections.] We know who those people are. [Interjections.]
The security breach at the national key point, however, provoked alarm and an extraordinary reaction by the government. [Interjections.] The acting head of the Department of State Security, Dennis Dlomo, is among the high-powered team of top government officials tasked with this investigation. That is the report that was due today. Or are we going to have to wait until the Gupta's have approved it? [Laughter.] It's just a question.
An HON MEMBER: They are probably having curry with the Guptas! [Laughter.]
Mr T W COETZEE: In the quote I left out the fact that there were also Cabinet Ministers. Listen to what The Daily News says further about state security. [Interjections.]
Therefore the ... cabinet ministers and senior government officials claiming to be mystified about the security breach (at Waterkloof) need to look no further than State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele and President Jacob Zuma (themselves).
[Interjections.] I want to add to that, Mr Minister. We can also lay the tragedies at Marikana and in the Central African Republic, where we lost 13 soldiers, on the Minister's doorstep. He was involved there, even if he denies it. [Interjections.] Jane Duncan ... [Interjections.] ... of the South African Civil Society Information Service asked on 23 October ... [Time expired.]
Mr J J MAAKE
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 525 & 526
Mr T W COETZEE
Mr J J MAAKE: Chairperson, hon Minister, members of the intelligence community, members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, hon Members of Parliament, and ladies and gentlemen, intelligence is the area that is usually least understood by a lot of people, the reason being that it is by its nature exactly like that: not to be understood! [Laughter.] It is therefore not surprising that each and every individual has his or her own understanding of what intelligence is all about. My own understanding is that intelligence means "not telling"! [Laughter.] It means working underground. It means working like a "spook" – as they are, of course, called.
When things go wrong, people usually ask where the intelligence was. Why didn't our intelligence pick it up? It is a genuine question, to be asked especially by a member of the civilian population who are, of course, ignorant of the operational side of intelligence.
The main objective of intelligence structures is not to arrest and convict perpetrators of illegal activities in this country. The main objective of these structures is to collect, evaluate, and disseminate information, especially information concerning all potential and actual enemies of the country, be they internal or external enemies. This information is then passed on to the relevant structures or organs, be they in the Defence Force or the Police Service, who then will use the information for arresting and convicting the perpetrators. It is very rare therefore to see, let alone know, who these operatives are.
How then do we determine the budget of a department like this? What happens if a situation arises where this department has added responsibilities because of a threatening situation having arisen? Maybe they should just get an open-ended budget where, every time they need funds, those funds are readily available, as long as they can account for them! [Laughter.] The same thing would apply to the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence. Does this committee have to go through all the processes of requesting funds for oversight if a matter needs immediate attending to? Sometimes these processes cause a delay and, in the meantime, things become worse. What are we actually then saying?
My suggestion is that this committee to some extent be treated differently, as it is indeed different. It was established by the Constitution. Well, I sometimes joke with my colleagues in the intelligence community when the intelligence operatives are awarded medals and certificates: Where do they hang these certificates, because we never see them in any of the houses that we usually visit? [Laughter.]
This short introduction was only to try to put the workings of intelligence in perspective. The Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, unlike many other committees, was established by the Constitution of this country – the supreme law of this country. Amongst others, the following Acts always determine the objectives of this committee. I would like to mention them: the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa itself, the Intelligence Services Oversight Act, Act 40 of 1994, the Intelligence Services Act, Act 65 of 2002, and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000.
With regard to the standing policies, I am not sure whether, after having listened to some of my colleagues' speeches, I should take these paragraphs out of my speech. The standing policies and the way the committee operates should serve as an example to the opposition in this House. The committee is never bogged down by party-political issues. We never introduce ourselves as members of parties. We work as one unit for the good and security of our country. After listening to some of the things that were said here today, can I put a question mark on them?
Whilst before the democratic dispensation intelligence agencies were used to maim, kill, arrest, and torture the majority of the people of this country and our neighbouring countries, in order to render them weak, we can today proudly say that ours is an Intelligence Service that is used to protect the country and its people, to protect the subregion and Africa as a whole, against crime, espionage, terrorism, and threats of violence, either within or outside the country.
The intelligence agencies were used to prevent a black government from taking over "die vaderland" [the motherland]. [Laughter.] I wouldn't, as a member of the ANC, call this a black government. Personally I would rather avoid saying that because, as I look around, especially within the ruling party, I see all national groups represented, unlike in the previous oppressive government which was totally and exclusively white. Ours can therefore not be called a black government. It is a government of the people. [Interjections.]
The Constitution of this country, in relation to governing principles of security services provides in section 198:
(a) National security must reflect the resolve of South Africans, as individuals and as a nation, to live as equals, to live in peace and harmony, to be free from fear and want and to seek a better life.
(b) The resolve to live in peace and harmony precludes any South African citizen from participating in armed conflict, nationally or internationally, except as provided for in terms of the Constitution or national legislation. ...
(c) National security is subject to the authority of Parliament ...
Can I repeat that? [Interjections.] I quote:
(c) National security is subject to the authority of Parliament and the national executive.
Section 199(6) goes further to provide:
No member of any security service may obey a manifestly illegal order.
[Interjections.] Subsection (7) of section 199 provides:
Neither the security services, nor any of their members, may, in the performance of their functions-
(a) prejudice a political party interest that is legitimate in terms of the Constitution; or
(b) further, in a partisan manner, any interest of a political party.
Subsection (8) provides that:
To give effect to the principles of transparency and accountability, multi-party parliamentary committees must have oversight of all security services in a manner determined by national legislation or the rules and orders of Parliament.
It has become necessary, from time to time, to remind some people in this House of the principles and the morality that govern the workings of institutions and agencies that operate in this country. This is a lesson from the principles enshrined in the supreme law of this country. That is why I had to take a very long quote from the Constitution – especially because some of the opposition nowadays are complacent and deliberately forget to read this small book! [Interjections.] When they were still not sure of the direction which the country would be taking – that was when they were still hoarding tinned foods in preparation for a prolonged war with the ruling party! – they would read this little book, that is, the Constitution, like a Bible.
When it comes to the defence of our country, South Africa is in a unique situation where our defence and security forces and agencies can, without doubt, be said to represent the country as a whole.
In some countries the defence and security forces represent the ruling party. In South Africa we can proudly say that our security and intelligence structures are for the defence of the country's citizens as a whole, without any discrimination.
It would, however, not be fair of me not to say anything about the behaviour of the opposition when it comes to sensitive issues concerning the security of the country. The opposition expects to be given this type of information. Those who would like to know what intelligence does and how they do it, and where and when they do it, are asking for the impossible. Where in the world, let alone in the whole universe, have we ever seen or heard of such a thing happening?
Let me refer to the President's words, that some people tend to think that they are ruling this country. They must from time to time be reminded that it is the ANC that is in power here ... [Applause.] ... and we have no intention of relinquishing this power to anybody, especially the DA, in the coming century.
If we were to go according to the demands of the opposition, especially the DA but all of them actually, we would have the following situation. Firstly, if we talk about the IFP, they would need a federal republic ... [Inaudible.] [Laughter.] The PAC would like us to drive the settlers into the sea! [Laughter.] The ACDP maybe would like us to ban the SACP and even arrest hon Nzimande! [Laughter.] I couldn't but find myself amazed by hon Swart in his speech in the debate on the Department of Home Affairs, when he was talking about Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, Brics. I listened very carefully. He mentioned all the countries that are involved in Brics but could not get himself to mention Russia! [Laughter.] So he simply omitted it. [Laughter.] The UCDP would maybe like us to restore Bophuthatswana, which will never happen. [Laughter.] The DA would like us to discontinue building RDP houses, and maybe invade Zimbabwe! [Laughter.] They would like us to forget about our international duty of peacekeeping in Africa and the world over. The Azanian People's Organisation, Azapo, would like us to change the country's name to Azania. [Laughter.] Cope would like us to let them be the custodians of the Freedom Charter, which will never happen. [Laughter.]
The ANC definitely supports the Budget Vote. Thank you. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY
UNREVISED HANSARD
EPC – COMMITTEE ROOM E249
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 Take: 527
Mr J J MAAKE
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: Chairperson, let me take this opportunity to thank all the members who participated in the debate. [Interjections.] Let me also thank the senior officials from the intelligence community of South Africa and the global intelligence community, who are here with us today, because we continue to co-operate.
Let me begin by trying to respond to a few issues. The hon Stubbe talked about how wrong and undesirable the restructuring is. It became clear to me that he was quoting the 1994 White Paper and he is married to it, whether it works or not, because he is a person who is always married to our past. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: No, Minister! You are wrong. You know it! [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: What was more worrying was when he actually said he was against the current oversight model of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and the Inspector-General. That worried me most in regard to what would happen if the DA came to power ... [Interjections.] ... because these were strictly negotiated ... [Interjections.] ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: ... to take our country from the shackles of apartheid to a democratic dispensation. And it works! So, it is quite clear to me that the DA may be speaking about democracy, but they are missing apartheid. [Interjections.] They are longing for their apartheid. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Some of their members claim that we never present a budget. We present a budget and our strategic plans to the JSCI on a yearly basis. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: Did you stop the investigation? [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: No, I am coming to that. I am coming! Just ... [Interjections.] I would like to speak in isiZulu, but you would not understand. [Interjections.]
Let me address your concern about the Minister of State Security's stopping the investigation into the Guptas' influence over the government. I would like to say, categorically, no. I am saying no because, firstly, we have not heard of the activities peddling certain information mentioned by the so-called Munusamy in the Daily Maverick. Then, there was no such investigation.
What we said, and we said this publicly, is that as the responsible Minister I would – and I always do – stop illegal activities, particularly where people use our capacity as intelligence to handle their private business ventures. We will never accept it and we will always stop it. So I just want to state that we will not allow our resources to be utilised for factional, personal, private battles. We will not allow it, because some of this interferes with people's human rights. That is what the members have been saying. We will not allow our assets to be used to listen to people illegally, even without the permission of a judge. We will always stop them, and I am not ashamed of that.
Other members have raised the concern of the challenges of terrorism, and they have gone even further in that regard. [Interjections.] They just read the newspapers; they do not listen to the briefings which we give them. They have even gone to the extent of saying that Al-Qaeda is creating cells under our very noses.
It is not our policy to comment on ongoing operational matters. We will not do so, even if things are raised in the media. What we have said, and we will continue to say, is that through our regular assessments we have become aware that some South Africans are actively linked to some elements which are involved in terrorist activities elsewhere – in particular Al-Qaeda. I am confident of this, because these are investigations which are being done with our different agencies collaborating with each other. I will not comment any further on that except to say – and let me just be clear on this – we are not a banana republic!
Let me appeal to members. It is one thing to have intelligence, but it is an altogether different kettle of fish to produce evidence that can be used in court. I would like to reiterate that our government is very committed to fighting this scourge of global terrorism.
We would like to say we have shown that we have adequate legislation, and we are even able to prosecute those who commit these acts outside our country, because of the nature of the Acts that we have in South Africa and their importance. The recent judgments in Johannesburg attest to this. People sat in our country and planned terrorist activities in Nigeria. We interacted with the Nigerians. Unfortunately, we could not prevent some of the killings, but the perpetrators have been sentenced in our courts.
At times it may take a long time. That is not because we are stupid, or we have inefficient intelligence. It takes time to convert intelligence into evidence. So, let us be patient on this.
Some hon members are concerned about the vacancies. We share that concern. We had intended that by this time we would have filled the vacant senior posts. Unfortunately, some of the processes in Parliament have gone a little slowly and we hope that with the finalisation of the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill we will be able to fill posts in the higher structures. It would be pre-emptive of us to start making such appointments before Parliament gives us an indication of where they want us to go. So, we share the concern.
Almost all the opposition members started shifting the subject of this debate to the Waterkloof incident, some of them even creating the impression that we are some form of a banana republic where aircraft just fly into our airspace and land without our knowing! There is no truth in that. Today the investigating team, which is being led by our Acting Deputy-General, Mr Dlomo, produced the interim report. What is left now is for our convenor in the cluster to co-ordinate us so that we can study the report, take further action where necessary and, at the appropriate time, take our public on board. It is not secret. [Interjections.]
While we await this report, let me say again that we are not a banana republic. What is being investigated is not whether there was authorisation or not. There was authorisation. We have that information, but what is in question is how that authorisation was obtained. That is what seems to be irregular. How was it done? So, let us as members be patient. Allow us, as government, to complete these processes. We will take you on board at an appropriate time.
I was worried about one member. I did not know about the insinuation that I was involved in the Central African Republic! We were involved in the CAR because we had soldiers there. We all know about the unfortunate incidents. We are still involved there now, because, as I said, the security situation in that country is deteriorating. This was the case even after the rebels took over, and even after the formation of the interim government, which is inclusive. People are being raped. Those of certain religions, particularly Christians, are being targeted and destroyed. If you could see what they have done to the cathedral in Bangui! We cannot allow that, because the Central African Republic has always been a secular republic – there are both Muslims and Christians there. We cannot allow the violation of basic human rights and the gross violation of human rights by the rebels. So, this is our involvement.
We said we would act through the region, the AU, and the United Nations which is conducting an investigation into what type of security resources – the numbers and the equipment – are needed to control security. Without security we cannot deal with the humanitarian situation in the Central African Republic.
With these words, let me say that I have tried to address as honestly as I can the concerns raised by the members, and I hope I have done so. We will continue to be the eye of the nation. We will continue to protect our country and our citizens against all sorts of threats, and we would like to work with you – even you, the opposition – because when national security is compromised, it affects not just the ruling party, but all of us.
HON MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
The MINISTER OF STATE SECURITY: With those words, I have been reliably advised by the head of my Ministry that you are all invited to the room next door for some light refreshments. We do not have much of a budget! [Laughter.] Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The Committee rose at 16:24.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents