Is the South African Government Soft on Transnational Corruption?
blurb:isstoday:150908corrupt
15 September 2008: Is the South African Government Soft on Transnational Corruption?
The opening up of borders as a result of globalisation has made it possible for corruption to grow at an alarming rate worldwide. Major bribery offences are increasingly transnational in character. The World Bank estimates that every year over US$1 trillion is paid in bribes around the world, compared to a global economy worth approximately US$30 trillion.
It is not uncommon for those suspected of grand corruption to seek and find safe havens in foreign jurisdictions to avoid prosecution in their home countries. The international exportation of corruption is thus increased. In such a context, the importance of international legal assistance cannot be overstated – a point to which the UN Convention against Corruption and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, attach great importance.
The South African government is seemingly selective in its approach to mutual legal assistance and extradition. It appears to elevate the principle only when it poses no imminent threat to senior government or ruling party officials – barring those whose relations with the president are a bit frosty. How otherwise does one explain the relatively swift legal action against Steven Goodwin, the alleged kingpin in the Fidentia asset management scandal, versus the tardy progress on John Stratton, the man accused of murdering mining magnate Brett Kebble and bribing police chief Jackie Selebi? Could it be that Stratton’s alleged links to Selebi afford him protection by those in high places?
Goodwin is currently in FBI custody in the US while trying to have his extradition to South Africa declared invalid. Earlier this year, Pretoria High Court Judge Ferdi Preller, could not extradite the alleged stem cell fraud couple Stephen van Rooyen and Laura Brown to face trial in America because parliament has failed to enact South Africa’s extradition agreement with the US into law. The decision impacts on every extradition agreement concluded by South Africa since 1996, including its agreement with Australia. Stratton is using this decision to support his and Goodwin’s case. In the meantime, barring his cancer and old age, his liberties remain relatively unfettered.
There are a few other instances in which South Africa’s approach to international legal co-operation seems questionable. One relates to the recent developments around the multi-billion dollar arms deal. Apparently following South Africa’s failure to co-operate fully with their requests for information, the German public prosecutor’s office in Düsseldorf recently permanently closed their probe into the sale of four German corvettes to the South African navy. Former employees of the German steel and arms manufacturing group, ThyssenKrupp, are believed to have paid $25 million (about R175 million) in kickbacks. Many South Africans who had thought that the German probe signalled hope of justice, the termination of the investigation is a bitter pill to swallow.
The justice ministry is also challenging the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) request for collaborative parallel investigations with the Scorpions. The SFO is probing more than R1 billion in secret “commissions” paid by British defence company, BAE systems. The investigation allegedly implicates deceased former South African defence minister Joe Modise and his special advisor, Fana Hlongwane. The South African National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) recently launched its own investigation into the saga, but apparent political interference, as suggested in the press, sees it struggling to obtain the necessary authorisation to work with the SFO and other international agencies. However, both the NPA and senior justice authorities reject the suggestion that there may be political interference with the operations of the NPA. Whether there is really no political interference or the NPA is wary of escalating existing tensions with political authorities, remains to be seen.
The justice department also reportedly rejected a request by Italian authorities for the extradition of convicted alleged Mafia boss, Vito Palazzolo, to serve a nine-year jail sentence. The department controversially denies that an extradition order was ever issued, while also arguing that the conviction is not “definitive”. One wonders what might be persuading the South African authorities to give such a conflicting signal, which is a further indictment to the country’s putative commitment to international legal assistance.
In an age of global criminal networks, fighting corruption effectively rests on more resolute and co-ordinated international co-operation and it is well known that limited legal co-operation between states makes this fight so much more difficult. Failure to take this into account risks rendering hollow the South African government’s commitment to fighting corruption at home and across borders.
Andile Sokomani, Corruption and Governance Programme, ISS Cape Town
