Press statement: LHR Disappointed by Flawed Arms Deal Commission Investigation
Press statement: LHR Disappointed by Flawed Arms Deal Commission Investigation
21 April 2016
Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) is disappointed by the findings of the Arms Procurement Commission that there was no evidence of wrongdoing within the 1999 Arms Deal.
LHR represented three critics before the Commission, Andrew Feinstein, Paul Holden, and Hennie Van Vuuren, until August 2014 when they were compelled to withdraw from the Commission. This was as a result of barriers put in place by the Commission.
These barriers occurred within the context of the resignation of key officials and concerns that the public would have no confidence in the outcome. Some of the concerns that erected barriers was around the Key evidence which was prevented from being presented to the Commission. Critical voices were also simply excluded from the hearings and investigations.
From the very beginning of the process, LHR registered its concerns regarding the processes and the ability of critical witnesses to be able to bring evidence before the Commission. During the hearings, it became clear that such concerns were warranted:
• Documents and statements were only provided to legal teams at the last minute, sometimes only the morning of a witness’s testimony. Requests for further time to study documents and statements were either denied or were met with hostility by the Commissioners;
• Legal teams were not allowed to refer to documents which had not already been admitted into evidence, by evidence leaders or persons themselves accused of wrongdoing, during cross-examination of witnesses;
• Witnesses were not allowed to refer to documents of which they were not the author;
• Evidence leaders were not allowed to be critical and cross-examine witnesses before the Commission.
These insurmountable barriers depended on overly rigid rules of evidence rather than a flexible approach to evidence which ought to mark the difference between a court proceeding and a commission of enquiry. This resulted in key evidence not being presented, or being refused admission, before the Commission and a serious lack of critical voices being heard. The Report, therefore, only provides one side of events.
LHR is disappointed by this missed opportunity to hold a thorough investigation into what is one of the most important series of events in post-apartheid South Africa. This process and ultimate findings could have restored confidence and provided an important precedent on how to conduct investigations that can garner public support and instil public confidence. Unfortunately, in this era of allegations of state capture and attacks on key institutions of democracy, this investigation fell far short of that promise.
LHR will further consider the report.
For more information, please contact LHR’s David Cote on 072 628 7698