Arms deal inquiry hampered by hidden details

Three arms deal campaigners who have been subpoenaed to testify before the Seriti Commission of Inquiry have warned that the credibility of the process was in serious danger unless significant changes were made to the way in which the commission operated.
  
Former ANC MP Andrew Feinstein, Paul Holden (author of The Arms Deal) and Hennie van Vuuren (former director of the Institute for Security Studies) who are represented by Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) expressed serious concern that the full story of the arms deal might never be made public.

The three were subpoenaed to testify before the commission and said they had the right to view any document the commission held to be relevant, yet have steadfastly been denied access to all documents and witness statements.

In a statement released by LHR, they said the commission presented a unique opportunity for the full story of the arms deal to be made public and for wrongdoers to be held accountable, but the opportunity would be squandered unless the commission cleared obstacles which prevented the truth from being told.

“Despite considerable evidence of wrongdoing being published over the previous decade, all investigations into the arms deal to date have been undermined by a lack of political will and documented interference by powerful individuals within and close to government, which made mockery of notions of accountability on which any functional democracy rests,” they said.

They expressed particular concern about the commission’s failure to give adequate notice to the public of witness lists and the evidence of government officials.

Despite numerous requests, witness statements were not made available to them and they were informed that the subject and content of evidence would only be revealed during the hearings.

This obstructed any meaningful preparation for cross-examination of witnesses and created the risk that the “official perspective” of navy and Armscor witnesses would go unchallenged at the inquiry.

The evidence leaders did not test the evidence, nor did any of the parties before the commission. As a result, it is a one-sided process, they added.

They complained that the commission had also failed to make a single document available to them and called on the commission on to make the information avilable
immediately.