All indications are that no-one on the shortlist to become South Africa’s inspector-general of intelligence will get the job, and the process will have to start afresh.
ANC loyalist and former MP Cecil Burgess was widely tipped to take over when incumbent Faith Radebe’s term expired at the end of last month. But it now seems no applicant was deemed good enough by parliament’s joint standing committee on intelligence.
The inspector-general must ensure South Africa’s much-maligned intelligence services, including its spies domestically and internationally, its crime intelligence and military intelligence, operate lawfully.
After a closed meeting, it is understood the committee decided to restart the process.
Members are not allowed to discuss its proceedings with the public, and committee chair and ANC MP Connie September said she would not comment on the issue.
DA MP David Maynier said September was acting in a rogue manner and had to be reined in.
Department of State Security spokesman Brian Dube could not be reached for comment.
It is understood that Jay Govender, legal advisor in the office of the inspector-general, will take over the top job in a caretaker capacity.
Murray Hunter, spokesman for the Right2Know Campaign, received a letter from National Council of Provinces chairwoman Thandi Modise, stating that the process had been concluded, but not what conclusion had been reached.
Right2Know favours greater transparency in the appointment of the inspector-general, and is frustrated by the committee’s actions.
“We do not know for sure whether the information is correct, because no-one has been taken into confidence,” Hunter said.
“If the information is correct, it could be a great thing if it means a more open process. Alternatively, it could mean the committee could not find anyone in whom they have confidence to handle the position.
“The problem is that the public has no way of knowing why, or whether, the decision was taken.
“Were the candidates too inexperienced or insufficiently independent? No one knows, because even the CVs are treated as confidential.
“The is not our friend. It acts as a secret enclave, closed to the public it is supposed to serve. We have tried to be reasonable with it and its chairperson, but it has no effect. We are at our wits’ end. The chairperson, Connie September, simply does not care. The only solution seems to be for the candidates to speak out and demand a public process, because the committee seems to be of no use.”
Shadow over top spy position
ANC loyalist and former MP Cecil Burgess was widely tipped to take over when incumbent Faith Radebe’s term expired at the end of last month. But it now seems no applicant was deemed good enough by parliament’s joint standing committee on intelligence.
The inspector-general must ensure South Africa’s much-maligned intelligence services, including its spies domestically and internationally, its crime intelligence and military intelligence, operate lawfully.
After a closed meeting, it is understood the committee decided to restart the process.
Members are not allowed to discuss its proceedings with the public, and committee chair and ANC MP Connie September said she would not comment on the issue.
DA MP David Maynier said September was acting in a rogue manner and had to be reined in.
Department of State Security spokesman Brian Dube could not be reached for comment.
It is understood that Jay Govender, legal advisor in the office of the inspector-general, will take over the top job in a caretaker capacity.
Murray Hunter, spokesman for the Right2Know Campaign, received a letter from National Council of Provinces chairwoman Thandi Modise, stating that the process had been concluded, but not what conclusion had been reached.
Right2Know favours greater transparency in the appointment of the inspector-general, and is frustrated by the committee’s actions.
“We do not know for sure whether the information is correct, because no-one has been taken into confidence,” Hunter said.
“If the information is correct, it could be a great thing if it means a more open process. Alternatively, it could mean the committee could not find anyone in whom they have confidence to handle the position.
“The problem is that the public has no way of knowing why, or whether, the decision was taken.
“Were the candidates too inexperienced or insufficiently independent? No one knows, because even the CVs are treated as confidential.
“The is not our friend. It acts as a secret enclave, closed to the public it is supposed to serve. We have tried to be reasonable with it and its chairperson, but it has no effect. We are at our wits’ end. The chairperson, Connie September, simply does not care. The only solution seems to be for the candidates to speak out and demand a public process, because the committee seems to be of no use.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos