Thuli gets same treatment Heath did for fighting fraud

The interest in Public Protector Thuli Madonsela’s reports into Nkandla and Prasa brings back stark memories of a time long forgotten.

The sharp criticism of and attacks on Madonsela by government ministers, ANC members of parliament and the ANC itself brings back memories of a time when the then head of the Heath special investigating unit,  Judge Willem Heath, was pushing hard for a full investigation into the Arms Deal.

In late-1999 and early-2000, Heath was castigated by the very government he was trying to help in fighting fraud, corruption and maladministration.

Early in his tenure as head of the Heath special investigating unit,  he made some bold statements about corruption,  one being that what we were seeing in the late-90’s, was only the “tip of the iceberg”.

Heath estimated – almost 18 years ago – that fraud, corruption and maladministration were costing the country billions of rand  per year.

This statement was decried by government and seen as “absurd” by the-then minister of finance,  Trevor Manual, and the ANC as a whole.

“We have corruption under control” was the statement by government.

Heath was rocking the boat and those in power didn’t like it.

Today research shows that South Africa has lost almost R700-billion in the last 20 years as a result of fraud, corruption and maladministration.  Nkandla and Prasa are  two prime examples.

There are striking similarities between what Madonsela is going through now and what Heath went through all those years ago.

The public protector  is a constitionally mandated  office while the special investigating unit was established under an act of parliament. Despite this,  both have similar reporting lines, both rely on government for funding and both have an obligation to the people of South Africa.

In her much-publicised media conference some weeks ago, Madonsela claimed that government was purposefully withholding a much-needed budget increase her office needed to operate more effectively.  Heath went through the same thing.

When Madonsela protected the integrity of herself and her office in defending her findings and recommendations into the Nkandla saga, she was criticised by high-profile, high-ranking national ministers and ANC members.  Heath went through the same thing.

As Madonsela continues to “rock the boat” and expose fraud, corruption and maladministration in government and parastatals, she continually comes under fire.

Often the criticism she receives is a well-orchastrated propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting her and her findings and undermining her office with “political spin”.  Heath went through the same thing.

So what of the fate of Madonsela as the public protector?

In the case of Heath, the Constitutional Court decided his fate based on a legal technicality.  Lawyers who were pillaging the Road Accident Fund – ironically something that continues to this very day – took the matter to the Constitutional Court, which ruled that a judge cannot head a special investigating unit.

Government and the ANC got lucky and were handed an easy way out. Heath would no longer be a thorn in their sides.  He had two options:  return to the bench or resign.

There was no way government was going to allow him to continue as head of the special investigating unit.

He chose the latter and left the bench with not so much as a handshake, a thank-you or a good-bye.  Contrary to popular belief Heath left with nothing,  no golden handshake,  not even a government pension pay-out because he was a judge of the high court.

Madonsela, I believe, is facing an uphill battle.

She will face an “internal rebellion” from her staff when they realise (if they have not done so already) that she is alienating them from government – essentially the hand that feeds them financially.

There will be efforts, both internally and externally,  to undermine her leadership and weaken her position.

There will be a continued and sustained propaganda campaign against her personally and there will be questions about the way in which her office operates, conducts its investigations and compiles its findings and reports.

All this designed to call her leadership and approach,  in terms of the separation of powers,  into question.

We have already seen this with the president and parliament refusing to accept her findings and recommendations.

Once this happens she may be called to parliament and “read the riot act” or she may be suspended on some trivial matter which will be designed to call into question her integrity and credibility.

Whichever the case, should Madonsela continue with the difficult task of exposing fraud, corruption and maladministration and should she continue to “rock the boat”, she is going to be the one who is going to fall off, and ultimately drown, in a sea of leaders who have scant regard for ethics and morality and who continue to condone outright acts of personal enrichment.

Guy Rich is a management and business consultant.  He specialises in leadership and strategic management.  He was personal assistant  to Judge Willem Heath and also managed the media relations for the-then Heath special investigating unit  between 1998 and 2001.