አዲስ አበባ “ለእሪታ ቀን” እንድትዘጋጅ ተጠየቀ! “ኢህአዴግ አገር የመምራት ብቃት እንደሌለው አዲስ አበባ ማሳያ ናት!!”

3 Comments

1. There is a big lesson to be learned from the following news. Those who preach about the fight for equality and justice may turn out to be a declaration of bunch of empty words. TPLF and its associated oligarchs will have to account for their excceses some time in the future.

   —————————————————————————————-
   Jacob Zuma told to repay cash spent on private homePresident used £13.7m of state funds for upgrade, watchdog’s report says, as findings lead to calls for resignationShare 141

   David Smith in Pretoria

   theguardian.com, Wednesday 19 March 2014 14.47 EDT

   Jacob Zuma must repay the costs of a pool, amphitheatre and chicken coop added to his home in Nkandla in a security upgrade. Photograph: Marco Longari/AFP/Getty
   Jacob Zuma, the president of South Africa, faced calls for his resignation on Wednesday after an anti-corruption watchdog found 246m rand (£13.73m) of taxpayers’ money had turned his private home into a display of “opulence on a grand scale” amid a sea of poverty.

   The damning report, which follows a two-year investigation, accused Zuma of unethical conduct and told him to repay the costs of a swimming pool, amphitheatre, visitor centre, cattle enclosure and chicken coop built as part of a state-funded security upgrade.

   The findings are damaging blow to the president, whose career has been dogged by graft and sex scandals, just seven weeks before Zuma’s African National Congress (ANC) goes into the most hotly contested election since the end of apartheid 20 years ago. The opposition demanded his impeachment.

   Zuma’s sprawling homestead near Nkandla in the hills of KwaZulu-Natal, his political stronghold and one of South Africa’s poorest provinces, has been at the centre of a long-running political controversy dubbed “Nkandlagate”. He has repeatedly insisted he paid for new buildings there out of his own pocket while the government funded security improvements after his election as head of state in 2009.

   But according to public protector Thuli Madonsela’s 444-page report: “This was not true. It is common cause that in the name of security, government built for the president and his family a visitors centre, cattle kraal and chicken run, swimming pool and amphitheatre. The president and his family clearly benefited from this.”

   While villagers do not have access to electricity or running water, the Nkandla project shows “opulence on a grand scale”, it continued, and “leaves one with the impression of excessive and unconscionable ‘Rolls Royce’ security constituting an island in a sea of poverty and paucity of public infrastructure”.

   Madonsela, a softly spoken lawyer renowned in South Africa for hard-hitting investigations,[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/08/jacob-zuma-investigation-plans-home] found Zuma’s neighbours were ordered to move home without proper authorisation, costing the state millions more. She accused Zuma of conduct “inconsistent with his office” and violating the executive ethics code by failing to protect state resources. He was “wearing two hats”, she said, as guardian of state resources and beneficiary. He also appointed his private architect who earned 16.5m rand (£922,796) from the project – a conflict of interest.

   “The president tacitly accepted the implementation of all measures at his residence and has unduly benefited from the enormous capital investment in the non-security installations at his private residence,” Madonsela found.

   The report found that at no point did Zuma express misgivings at the scale of the construction, even though it would have raised the eyebrows of a “reasonable person”. It added: “A substantial amount of public money would have been saved had the president raised his concerns in time.”

   In November, Zuma told parliament he had decided to expand his home and fence it off. “My residence in Nkandla has been paid for by the Zuma family,” he said. “All the buildings and every room we use in that residence, was built by ourselves as family and not by government.”

   Madonsela stopped short of saying this was a deliberate attempt to mislead MPs. “I have accepted the evidence that he addressed parliament in good faith and was not thinking about the visitors centre, but his family dwelling, when he made the statement. It appears to have been a bona fide mistake and I am accordingly unable to find that his conduct was in violation of … the executive ethics code.”

   At a press conference on Wednesday, she added: “There is no evidence that the president lied.” But she ordered Zuma to pay a “reasonable percentage” of the cost of the renovations not related to security at his homestead and “reprimand the ministers involved for the appalling manner in which the Nkandla project was handled and state funds were abused”.

   When news of the security upgrade broke in 2009 in the Mail & Guardian newspaper, the cost was estimated at 65m rand. B ut despite a steady flow of media reports, the bill soared to 215m rand by the end of Madonsela’s research and is now estimated at246m rand.

   The total spending amounted to eight times the estimated present-day value of securing the home of Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first black president, who died in December aged 95.

   Madonsela said there was systemic incompetence and flouting of tender procedures, leading to “exorbitant” and “exponential” cost overruns. “The manner in which the Nkandla project was administered and implemented gave me the impression of a toxic concoction of a lack of leadership, a lack of control and focused self-interest.”

   She added: “The expenditure incurred by the state … went beyond what was reasonably required for the president’s security, was unconsciously excessive and caused a misappropriation of funds… Some of these measures can be legitimately classified as unlawful and the acts involved constitute improper conduct and maladministration.”

   Madonsela’s report, entitled Secure in Comfort, said funds had to be diverted from inner-city regeneration projects to carry out the upgrade. It detailed how a pool was justified in official documents as “firefighting” equipment, and how Zuma personally requested changes to the design of bullet-proof windows.

   Zuma, a former Robben Island prisoner and a polygamous Zulu traditionalist, is no stranger to scandal. He was acquitted of rape, and only became president after corruption charges against him were dropped on a technicality days before the 2009 poll. While in office he fathered a child with the daughter of a close friend.

   “Nkandlagate” has haunted his presidency and been described as possibly the biggest concern among voters in the election on 7 May. While the ANC remains assured of victory, its majority could drop below 60% for the first time, which may lead members to call for 71-year-old Zuma’s head.

   The Democratic Alliance opposition party said in light of the “damning findings” it would urgently initiate impeachment proceedings against Zuma. Lindiwe Mazibuko, its parliamentary leader, said: “Today is an historic day in our fight against the corruption, cronyism and nepotism which have run rampant during President Jacob Zuma’s term in office. It is a victory for the constitution and the rule of law.”

   Mamphela Ramphele, leader of Agang SA, said: “It is clear that President Zuma should go immediately. Even in the bad old days of apartheid, the then head of state John Vorster fell on his sword after the Information Scandal, yet now we are faced with a head of state 20 years into our democracy who has shown he will stop at nothing to hold on to power.”

   The government’s own investigation in December cleared Zuma of wrongdoing, saying the improvements were needed for security reasons. A statement from the presidency on Wednesday said: “The public protector’s report will be an additional tool which will fall under the consideration of President Zuma in addressing allegations of maladministration. The president will study the findings and recommendations of the public protector in the context of the existing government interventions and will communicate his response in due course.”

2. Ereta for whom ? to whom ? is it workable ? unless accompanied with measure to alleviate the problem. It is a forgone conclusion woyane ,as usual ,turn a deaf ear or put organizers behind bar a head of the day, Mind you woyane has been given one month to conspire and quell the mass demonstration.Why not stage the demonstration in very short time ?,because the anger is already over spilled . people have felt the pain deeply. So we need to cast the iron while it is hot.. Any ways it is one big step which sends vital message to dumb ass woyane .

3. yasazinal, sew hulu teribo endet and meri yetebale geleseb be serqot lay segne beTam yegrmal. Neger gin lemin eskeahun tedebeqe, yemilew tiyaqe, leman tiqim eyesera new wedemilew meseretawi tiyaqe yameral. ya iskaltemelese dires ENTC enna Woyane luinetu men lay new

Comments are closed.