Inspector-General of Intelligence vacancy: Interviews Day 1

Meeting report

At the start of each interview, the Chairperson explained the interview process to the candidate and the Committee members on the panel introduced themselves.

The Chairperson read out Section 210 of the Constitution dealing with intelligence services:

Powers, functions and monitoring
210. National legislation must regulate the objects, powers and functions of the intelligence services, including any intelligence division of the defence force or police service, and must provide for—
(a) the co-ordination of all intelligence services; and
(b) civilian monitoring of the activities of those services by an inspector appointed by the President, as head of the national executive, and approved by a resolution adopted by the National Assembly with a supporting vote of at least two thirds of its members.

The Chairperson also referred to the Intelligence Services Oversight Act of 1994.

Candidate 1: Adv Jayashree Govender
The Chairperson asked the candidate to tell the panel about her vision for the Office of the Inspector-General, the challenges there are and how these can be corrected going forward.

Mr G Magwanishe (ANC) asked the candidate if there were differences between the doctrine of state security and national security. If any, what are these differences?

Mr K Mmoiemang (ANC, Northern Cape) referred to the candidate’s 17 years of experience at the Office of the Inspector-General (OIGI). He asked if she had ever encountered what could be referred to as politicisation of the intelligence services. He noted the candidate did not raise this as a challenge in her previous response. He said the candidate answered that evidence of OIGI challenges was given at the Zondo Commission but that they are untested. The IGI in his evidence to the Zondo Commission made reference to the instances he felt were anomalous.

Mr Mmoiemang asked why the IGI exercises oversight over the State Security Agency (SSA), Criminal Intelligence and Defence Intelligence yet its budget is derived from the SSA. He asked the candidate to explain if this was 'untested'? There should be 34 OIGI staff; however ten of those positions are unfilled. Was that also 'untested'? There is a lack of OIGI independence as it shares its IT infrastructure and internet server with SSA. This means everything OIGI does could potentially be observed by SSA including investigations on SSA. Was this 'untested'?

Ms D Kohler Barnard (DA) said the Zondo Commission saw the then Minister of State Security attempting to forbid the Acting Director General of SSA from giving evidence. This attempt failed and the IGI also went on to provide evidence. She asked if the candidate would have backed off as per ministerial instruction if she found herself in the same position or would she have provided evidence.

Dr M Ndlozi (EFF) raised a point of order and said Ms Barnard already had her 10 minutes to ask questions. Follow-up questions should be asked only after each panel member has had a turn.

The Chairperson said it should be done that way.

Ms Kohler Barnard asked the candidate to spell out the functions that the President may designate to the IGI according to the legislation. In which case does the outcome or report have to be presented to the President or the Joint Standing Committee of Intelligence? If the report should be presented to the President, does the candidate believe there are certain IGI functions that the IGI does not have to report to the Committee?

If the OIGI issues instructions on how to resolve challenges, are the intelligence services or even ministers obliged to follow the IGI recommendations?

Ms D Dlakude (ANC) said the 2008 Matthews Commission report said that the OIGI must be given an independent status with its own administration and budget. What is the candidate’s views on this and how would she ensure the OIGI obtains its independent status, if appointed?

Ms M Dikgale (ANC) said to ensure the OIGI has greater autonomy, there is an urgent need for legislative review of its functioning and resources. The current configuration – resourced through SSA – has demonstrated oversight will be weakened and leads to the politicisation of SSA. She asked if the candidate thought the OIGI would function better if the IGI had a Deputy IGI to assist. What legislative amendments are required for the OIGI?

Mr B Hadebe (ANC) said Section 7(2) of the Act states that the IGI shall be a South African citizen who is a fit and proper person and has knowledge of Intelligence. Looking at the candidate’s CV it was clear that she had this knowledge. His understanding of this was that the person should have values of honesty, integrity and complete confidentiality. He was by no means casting aspersions in asking this question but Members of Parliament should fully ventilate issues that are in the public domain to offer some measure of assurance to South Africans. He asked what the candidate’s role was in the SARS Rogue Unit investigation and if there has been any wrongdoing from her side.

He had hoped to hear more on the candidate’s role in the SARS Rogue Unit investigation. He understood that the candidate said external people were criticising her. He asked if the candidate had been implicated in wrongdoing as part of this investigation? Did the candidate think she was a fit and proper person?

Mr D Stubbe (DA) said the candidate mentioned in her introduction that she would strengthen the OIGI in terms of the current legislation and asked how she would go about this and what she thought needed to be strengthened? In practice, in the past, he could not recall the OIGI reporting on current issues happening at OIGI. The Committee was always informed of an issue after it happened. Everyone knew about the Principal Agent Network (PAN) Project except this Committee and there should be a mechanism that forewarns the Committee on what is to come.

Dr Ndlozi noted the candidate spent five years as a student at the University of Natal and asked if she was politically active and why not? She was fully aware that the IGI is a function of the Constitution and that one has to be passionate about justice. The candidate is asking to be in a high calling, but during her student days in the 1980s, the University of Natal was burning. If the candidate was not politically active, what was she doing? He asked if the candidate’s passion for justice came later on in her life. One of the biggest complaints the Committee may be faced with when it deliberates on the candidates is a careerist path – that the candidate was just rising through the bureaucratic ranks. There is something about the condition "of being moved" by things which he needed for his deliberations.

At the State Capture Commission, Pravin Gordhan admitted to the existence of an intelligence unit within SARS which confirmed aspects of the OIGI Report in which the candidate participated. In the candidate’s view, was this intelligence unit legal or illegal? If, for instance, we consider the Department of Higher Education and the Minister of Intelligence sets up an intelligence unit which investigates students who participated in student politics; in law, would this be legal? If not, would the IGI be mandated to investigate this matter? He asked if it was the candidate’s legal advice not to oppose it when the High Court set aside the OIGI Report on the 'SARS Rogue Unit'. He said the intelligence services was highly politicised according to many observations which he thought were correct. There are a lot of factions within the intelligence community and he asked if the candidate belonged to a faction within it? What is the candidate’s view of the factions and what can be done to strengthen oversight over the intelligence community to prevent the OIGI from being factionalized?

The Chairperson asked for any follow-up questions.

Mr Hadebe referred to the High-Level Review Panel on the SSA and Related Matters and said this meant that issues were raised and not taken seriously. The oversight mechanism includes the OIGI. What role has the candidate played to change the status quo to ensure the OIGI is taken seriously in terms of its scope, mandate and KPIs?

Ms Kohler Barnard said there would be those who would object to the candidate’s role to monitor the three intelligence services. How would the candidate deal with the inevitable push-back? There was information in the media recently about an anonymous claim questioning the qualifications of a senior SSA member. Those allegations proved to be false. Would the candidate make such representations to the media in an attempt at transparency with the concurrent damage to that individual’s reputation? The relationd between the three services are adversarial as each entity attempts to protect its own. If conflict resolution fails, what would be the candidate’s next step? Does the candidate think the newspaper leaks which have had SSA on its covers week after week for the past two years has damaged the three entities or has it enhanced transparency and is this in the public’s interest or not?

Ms Dlakude said the candidate has been in the OIGI for 17 years advising the IGI, so whatever the IGI did right or wrong also reflects on the candidate as the legal advisor. The High Level Panel Report referred to SSA as a cash cow. The candidate knew that it was not an event but a process to come across such wrongdoing. She asked if the candidate put measures in place to ensure this does not reoccur or has she reported some of the wrongdoing to the relevant authorities? The candidate said she believed in establishing relationships with entities having similar oversight functions to the OIGI. Based on this response, would the candidate not agree that the OIGI is overseeing intelligence services which work with sensitive information.

Dr Ndlozi asked if the candidate would appeal the court ruling setting aside the OIGI Report on an intelligence unit within SARS, if appointed as IGI. There were problems between her and the current IGI which the Committee is aware of and which have not been resolved. What was the candidate’s relationship with previous IGIs? Was this unique or has the candidate ever complained to the Committee before about her boss other than her current boss?

Mr Mmoiemang said he wanted to get a sense if the candidate thought it was a challenge that the IGI was compelled to consult the three Ministers and the President before disclosing any intelligence information that is subject to restriction?

The Chairperson said he saw it as a contradiction that the candidate said matters that the OIGI was investigating were already in the media. He asked for clarity on this.

Mr Stubbe said the idea what not to know how the OIGI was going about its investigation. However, the Committee reads about this only in the media and is not informed by the OIGI. It would be good practice if the Committee is made aware of investigations.

Mr Magwanishe thanked the candidate for availing herself for the interview and said the outcome would be communicated to her once the process was concluded.

Candidate 2: Dr Nyelisani Clarence Tshitereke
The Chairperson asked the candidate to tell the panel about his vision for the Office of the Inspector-General, the challenges there are and how these can be corrected going forward.

Mr Stubbe asked how the candidate would change the intelligence environment if appointed. In the majority of cases such implementation needed a change in legislation. How would the candidate change the legislation?

Mr Mmoiemang asked what the candidate thought was the remedy to mitigate challenges faced by the intelligence industry in its proximity to political office bearers, particularly the executive, and ensure that the IGI can operate in an environment to which the candidate has alluded.

Mr Hadebe said the candidate constantly referred to issues that should be dealt with by the JSCI and that it was incumbent on the Committee to hold people to account. The High Level Review Panel Report raised concerns about the extent to which OIGI played a role in identifying abuse in SSA. The Panel made recommendations for the OIGI; however no actions were taken or consequence management. This resulted in the Panel asking if recommendations should become binding similar to those of the Public Protector. He asked for the candidate’s thoughts on the High Level Panel Report recommendations.

The Chairperson asked a follow-up question for clarity. If he were to say that the OIGI was an operational arm of the Committee, and some things were not shared with the Committee that were from the President or the Minister, did the candidate not think this was dangerous? The Minister might ask the IGI to do something illegal and the Committee may not be aware of this. It was constantly said that the Committee needed to initiate legislation amendments but if the IGI told the Committee about the necessary amendments that need to happen, is this not initiating?

Ms Dikgale said to ensure that the OIGI has greater autonomy, there was an urgent need for a legislative review of the functioning and resources of the IGI. The current reconfiguration being resourced through SSA has demonstrated that it will be weakened and will lead to the politicisation of SSA. She asked if the candidate thought the Office would function better if the IGI had a Deputy IGI to assist? What legislative amendments are required for the OIGI?

Ms Dlakude said the 2008 Matthews Commission report stated that the OIGI must be given an independent status with its own administration and budget. What is the candidate’s views on the matter and how would he ensure that the OIGI obtains its independent status, if appointed? How would the candidate improve the enforceability of the IGI recommendations and why? Section 14(1)(a) and (b) of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliaments and Provincial Legislatures Act provides for a joint committee like the JSCI to summons any person to come before it and give evidence or reports  under oath.  What is the candidate’s understanding of Section 14 in light of the certificates and other reports produced by the IGI?

Ms Kohler Barnard asked if she was correct that the candidate was last involved in intelligence in 2004 with the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), then he had a stint in Housing and Defence in 2009 to 2011 which was when Principal Agent Network was run where the claim was that people were walking away with billions. This was a very dark time and PAN was eventually suspended. She asked if the candidate was aware of this happening at the time and if so, had he raised it with the various agencies?

Ms Barnard said there will be people in power who will object to what you do, if appointed, as you would be investigating people that others would want to protect. There are three Ministers who may become very angry when they are investigated. How would the candidate deal with this?

Dr Ndlozi said he found the candidate’s timeline rather interesting as he had worked for the Presidency, Minister Lindiwe Sisulu and Susan Shabangu amongst other ministers. This was a bit confusing as he obtained a PhD and then was lecturing between 2004 and 2009, but between July 2004 and June 2005, the candidate was a Senior Analyst at the NIA which is overlapping. In September 2004, the candidate was at Queen’s teaching. He asked the candidate to explain this.

One of the things that the various intelligence reports, including the Mufamadi Report, talks about is heavy intelligence capability in the private sector. He asked if the candidate knew of any at Old Mutual? There are a lot of senior apartheid intelligence agents there. He asked the candidate to comment on this?

The Chairperson interjected asking if the candidate thought this was a fair question and that he could answer if he would like to.

Dr Ndlozi said the candidate came with references from too many Ministers and has done a lot of political and national intelligence work. He asked why the candidate should be placed in an oversight role which requires a heightened sense of objectivity? The candidate was a part of the National Coordinating Intelligence Committee (NICOC) from 2006 to 2007 December which was a highly politicised time moving toward the 2007 ANC Conference where the abuse of intelligence services was at its highest. He asked the candidate to share if any such discussions had taken place and if so, what is the candidate’s view, particularly in light of politicisation. He asked how the candidate would de-politicise intelligence services?

Mr Magwanishe asked if it was the candidate’s understanding that this was a Portfolio Committee?

The Chairperson asked about oversight and the IGI being given an assignment by the President. It is in the Intelligence Services Oversight Act that if such as assignment is given, a report must be given to the President. He asked if the candidate did not think this was a dangerous thing to do?

Ms Kohler Barnard said the candidate had worked in so many departments and that it had been nearly 20 years since he had worked in intelligence. She asked what had brought the candidate back to apply for such a position given how things have changed dramatically in intelligence over the years.

Ms Dikgale said that normally when two elephants fight, the grass suffers. Experience has taught us that the IGI position is a very challenging one as one would be working with people from different branches. Given the candidate’s ability to interact with various stakeholders, how would he handle challenges that may arise?

Mr Mmoiemang said the memorandum of understanding between the IGI and other entities has been the hallmark of the IGI. To a certain extent this has damaged the IGI image resulting in tension between Criminal Intelligence and the IGI. The piggy-backing somehow lead to access of classified information through IPID. The 2014 IGI Report was only used in 2019. In 2020 this report was set aside by the Court. He asked if the candidate thought there was a need to review the oversight modus operandi?

Ms Dlakude said the High Level Panel Report refers to SSA as a cash cow and identified challenges within the three entities. How would the candidate ensure that some of the challenges are minimized within the intelligence communities?

Dr Ndlozi said the candidate said he did not get involved in politics. However, he had authored an article in 2009 and signed off as Senior Researcher in the Department of Defence and Military Veterans which was a direct response to then-Minister of Human Settlements, Tokyo Sexwale. The candidate defended the policies and programmes of Minister Lindiwe Sisulu whom he worked with at the time. He asked if this was not evidence of involvement in politics by doing policy analysis and getting into public spats with politicians? Who was the Intelligence Coordinator when he worked at the NIA? When the candidate spoke of the 2007 ANC conference and was receiving intelligence product that individuals did not want, was he admitting that the intelligence service was used to fight the factional battles of the ANC in the lead up to that conference?

The Chairperson asked if the candidate had any questions or comments.

Break

Candidate 3: Ms Faith Mosa Makhobotloane
The Chairperson asked the candidate to tell the panel about her vision for the Office of the Inspector-General, the challenges there are and how these can be corrected going forward.

Dr Ndlozi asked if the candidate was trained in Russia in 2011 and what training she received there? She then worked with Nelson Mandela’s Cabinet and the first Minister of Intelligence, Joe Nhlanhla. The candidate now works with the current IGI and had also worked with the previous IGI. Due to a serious lack of public confidence in South Africa’s intelligence community, why should people from the NIA, SSA and those who have already been working in the environment, be appointed? Would this not seem like merely recycling people who have been in the system, but are not doing any good? Intelligence services have been compromised in South Africa due to internal factionalism being abused by politicians in the many years of President Thabo Mbeki, Jacob Zuma and the short years of President Cyril Ramphosa. He asked if the candidate was not confusing 'a support role to the services' with uprooting the 'cash cow' situation, politicisation, abuse and factionalism which has crippled the intelligence services itself? This does not inspire confidence given that the candidate said a person from the environment would be suitable for the position. He asked her thoughts on this?

Mr Magwanishe asked if the candidate thought it was wise to put her competitor as a reference.  He referenced Section 199(8) of the Constitution and asked which two principles it gave effect to.

Mr Stubbe said the functions of the IGI is to report on what is wrong, but the candidate then moved to SSA in 2009 until 2013 which is when there were huge challenges in SSA, one of them being the PAN project. Did the candidate not deem it fit to report the wrongdoing in SSA? What was the candidate's role when there was an investigation into the PAN project?

Mr Mmoiemang asked about criticisms about the IGI's lack of independence from the Executive and Minister popularly known as politicisation. This criticism was raised when Ms Faith Radebe was the IGI. The environment she created and her background limited the independence of the Office. He asked the candidate to comment on this.

The IGI had no mandate in law for the OIGI investigation into SARS. Does the candidate not think the IGI was compromised when the OIGI report was set aside by the High Court? He asked what measures the OIGI has put in place to address the challenges raised by the IGI at the Zondo Commission? There should be a programme of action to mitigate these challenges.

The Chairperson asked for clarity on the reference to a time when the OIGI had a 'cordial relationship with the intelligence services' and what went wrong.

Mr Hadebe said in the candidate’s introduction she cried foul that the OIGI used to be in partnership with the intelligence services, but was now policing them. Is the candidate confirming wrongdoing in the intelligence services? If appointed, would it be uncomfortable to investigate the intelligence services or is the candidate confident in having only a cordial relationship with them?

The Chairperson said the Committee needs to know what challenges there are – as all can agree that something went wrong in the intelligence services. The Committee can only solve the issues once it knows what and when something went wrong.

The Chairperson asked if the challenge was in the candidate’s office.

Ms Dikgale noted there was a civil claim judgment against the candidate. She asked for details and how the candidate could be trusted in this position? She asked if the candidate thought the OIGI would function better if the IGI had a Deputy IGI to assist.

Ms Dlakude noted the candidate's earlier response that she did not know what her colleagues were investigating. She had an issue with this. If a colleague happened to die, the person would die with the information. The assignment would have to be given to a new person who would have to start from scratch. She asked if the candidate thought this was a waste of time and resources. If appointed, how would the candidate change the status quo to ensure everyone in OIGI receives the same information even if they are not working on the same case? How could relationships be established with entities that perform the same functions? What would the candidate do to obtain an independent status for the OIGI?

Ms Kohler Barnard said the OIGI issues instructions on how to resolve challenges to the intelligence services and the ministers, but none are obliged to follow these. What is the candidate’s plan to enforce recommendations? The candidate spoke of how during the PAN Project one would not necessarily know that the office next door could be looting billions as the OIGI worked in silos. We read in the newspaper that Arthur Fraser's right-hand man has been promoted. What plans does the candidate have to break through the wall of secrecy that prevents the OIGI from doing the work it is mandated to do? The way this Committee has been treated has been appalling as it only receives little titbits of information. If the candidate had been subpoenaed by the Zondo Commission and the Minister had said she may not give evidence – which actually happened to the Acting Director General of SSA – who would the candidate answer to, the Commission or the Minister? What steps would she take?

The Chairperson asked the candidate how she felt about the interview and if she had any misgivings? The candidate was informed that the outcome of the interview process would be communicated to her.

Candidate 4: Mr Mampogoane Petrus Nchabaleng
The Chairperson asked the candidate to tell the panel about his vision for the Office of the Inspector-General, the challenges there are and how these can be corrected going forward.

Mr Hadebe referred to the High Level Review Panel Report which stated that the OIGI recommendations were not taken seriously, lacked implementation and consequence management. He asked the candidate if such recommendations should be treated as enforceable as is the remedial action recommended by the Public Protector.

A discomfort is that the candidate is still currently part of the OIGI and asked if the candidate has voiced his views on changing the status quo.

Mr Hadebe noted the candidate's CV and his political affiliation to the ANC. The High Level Review Panel Report looked at what went wrong in the intelligence services and states that it was the emergence of divisions within the ANC, politicisation and factionalism. How would the candidate insulate himself from the contributing factors of what went wrong within the intelligence services?

Mr Mmoiemang said the IGI sketched out the challenges faced by the OIGI such as lack of independent budget and lack of oversight over SSA and Defence Intelligence. What concrete measures are in place to fix the challenges raised at the Zondo Commission?

The Chairperson asked what the candidate suggested to remedy the challenges as this was not clear in his response.

Mr Stubbe asked the candidate if he ever felt that some information he received from entities was withheld.

Dr Ndlozi asked the candidate to stick to the time limits as his answers tended to be repetitive.

Mr Magwanishe asked the effect of Chapter 3 of the Constitution on the work of the OIGI.

Dr Ndlozi asked the candidate if he reported corruption outside of the OIGI so that an independent body investigates? Has the candidate ever reported irregularities and inefficiencies encountered within the OIGI? The candidate previously applied for the same position and he had given the name of a politician or an MEC as a reference which had raised a red flag about his independence, however the candidate continued to work for the OIGI. If the candidate is not appointed, would he continue to work at the OIGI? The Committee has the responsibility to give the public confidence in candidate. He asked why the candidate should be considered since he had never reported irregularities or done anything that caused him discomfort?

The Chairperson said Dr Ndlozi was alleging that the candidate had not reported some irregularities and asked which ones these were.

Dr Ndlozi said the candidate admitted to this earlier on in the interview. Had the Chairperson not heard this?

The Chairperson clarified what he was asking and said the Committee should be fair.

Dr Ndlozi said he fundamentally disagreed with this as the candidate said he had never reported any irregularities externally except to the director-general.

The Chairperson asked what irregularities these were.

Dr Ndlozi said this did not matter. What was the Chairperson trying to protect as he was suppressing him? The candidate was present and could say if he did not want to answer the question.

The Chairperson said Dr Ndlozi could not ask such a question as there may not have been any wrongdoing to report.

Dr Ndlzoi said the Chairperson should not answer for the candidate and collapse the process.

The Chairperson said the candidate should answer.

Ms Kohler Barnard said there would be three Ministers and three Directors General who would all be trying to protect their own people against the IGI. How would the candidate deal with that type of attack and push back? She noted that the Minister at the time attempted to prevent the Acting Director General of the State Security Agency from giving evidence at the Zondo Commission. She asked if the candidate would have backed off if the Minister had asked him to? She asked what the candidate would do if he produced a report, but heard nothing back six months later which means his recommendations were not implemented.

The Chairperson asked what type of recommendations or remedies the IGI had, because they were recommendations and not instructions. He asked what he meant by remedial action.

Ms Dlakude said the candidate mentioned that if appointed, he would take the Office to the level of a maturity stage and asked what the candidate meant by this. People in the OIGI work in silos. How would the candidate ensure that everyone knows what is happening in the Office?

Ms Dlakude said the 2008 Matthews Commission report said that the OIGI must be given an independent status with its own administration and budget. What is the candidate’s views on this. How would he ensure that the OIGI obtains its independent status, if appointed?

The Chairperson said the Minister shall cause the OIGI report and certificate to be transmitted to the Committee but what happens if the Committee decided to call the OIGI Office directly as it was an operational arm of the Committee? Would it be against legislation if the Committee called the IGI to submit the certificate to it?

There was uncertainty on the procedure of the annual presentation to the JSCI of the OIGI certificates of activities for each intelligence service. 
The IGI shall brief the Committee on the certificate submitted to each Minister.

Ms Dikgale said she was concerned about the way the OIGI dealt with anonymous submissions. The person who submitted will be protected, but the content becomes public before it can be investigated. How would the candidate improve this process?

The Chairperson asked a follow-up question on information that gets out which in turn exposes the whistle blowers or complainants.

Dr Ndlozi said the candidate was lamenting the weakness of the firewalls between OIGI and SSA. In light of the emerging technologies in artificial intelligence and cyber security, what tools would the candidate employ to avert cyber attacks on the OIGI?

The Chairperson asked the candidate how he felt about the interview process and if he had any comments. He said the outcome would be communicated to the candidate once the process was complete.

Candidate 5: Rev Frank Chikane
The Chairperson asked the candidate to tell the panel about his vision for the Office of the Inspector-General, the challenges there are and how these can be corrected going forward.

Dr Ndlozi said in the 1970s the candidate interacted a lot with President Cyril Ramaphosa and asked if he was friends with the sitting President. Has the ANC or the President asked the candidate to apply for this position directly or indirectly? The politicisation of the intelligence services is a very important matter and the intelligence services are compromised, so we are looking for someone with independence. He asked the candidate to comment on this.

He asked if the candidate was a part of the Defend our Democracy SA with Adrian Gore, CEO of Discovery. Gore was almost the candidate’s age, but never participated in the struggle. What disturbed him about Gore was that he hosted Tony Blair at a 2012 Leadership Summit that Bishop Desmond Tutu withdrew from due to the actions of Tony Blair. He is a regular visitor to Israel.

He asked what it meant when the candidate could meet with Mr Gore and sit in the same space with him when he does not care about the democracy of Palestinians, which the candidate cares about? Why should there not be concern about this moral compromise? He asked if he did not mind as long as people supported his project.

The candidate was the Director General in the Presidency when the 2008 xenophobic attacks took place in which there were terrible intelligence failures. Was this really the failure of the law or was there something deeper at play? Many people can testify that the politicisation of the intelligence services actually happened in its heightened form leading up to the 2007 ANC conference. People have testified about spying on politicians at that time already. He asked for the candidate’s comment.

Mr Magwanishe asked for the effect of the Constitution's Chapter 3: Cooperative Governance on the IGI. What is the candidate’s value proposition to resolve the challenges faced by the OIGI? Having read the White Paper, did the candidate not find it odd that the State Security Agency was still called that?

Mr Stubbe said he was impressed with the candidate's history and experience. He asked if the candidate would seriously consider a relook at the legislation to enhance oversight, if appointed.

Mr Mmoiemang asked about the politicisation of the IGI and the impact of the National Strategic Intelligence Act on the role it gave the Minister to oversee the entire functioning of the three intelligence services. There is a proposition that part of the weakening of the oversight function relates to the administration and the executive authority. At the Zondo Commission, the IGI raised executive outreach in matters of administration. What are the candidate’s thoughts on the challenges rasied by the IGI at the Zondo Commission? The Chapter 9 bodies have collaborated using a Memorandum of Understanding. However, there have been instances where oversight bodies would ride on the back of the IGI’s access to intelligence to obtain information they did not have access to. The former IGI report on the SARS investigation unit was completed in 2014, but only used in 2019 and then the report was set aside in 2020. Does the candidate think there is a need to relook at the lack of cooperative governance?

Mr Hadebe noted that several IGI findings remain unimplemented to date. If appointed, the candidate be entering a space where there are legacy issues. The then IGI said there was a culture of non-accountability in SSA and that has not been addressed. There is continual politicisation of SSA which remains a problem. The intelligence and counter intelligence activities at the provincial level have been seriously compromised by the lack of human capacity in strategic areas. All these issues render the OIGI useless. What changes would the candidate effect to restore the dignity of the Office?

Ms Dikgale said she heard the candidate’s determination to make a change and requested that he do this by stopping corruption. She was covered by the previous Members' questions. She had hope that people like the candidate would turn to God when in trouble.

The Chairperson made a lighthearted comment that he did not think this was a fair comment as there were many communists in the room.

Ms Dlakude said intelligence should not be political but about the country as a whole. It was important to work together to ensure matters get done by the book and those found on the wrong side of the law should face the music. There are many reports which should have been presented to the Committee such as the R17 million heist at SSA the candidate referred to. To date the Committee has not received this. The High Level Panel Report agreed with the 2006 Task Team Report on Review of Intelligence-Related Legislation, Regulations and Policies as well as the 2008 Matthews Commission Report that the OIGI must be given an independent status with its own administration and budget. What is the candidate’s views on the matter and how would he ensure that the OIGI obtains its independent status, if appointed?

Section 14(1)(a) and (b) of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliaments and Provincial Legislatures Act provides for a joint committee to summons any person to come before it and give evidence or reports  under oath. What is the candidate’s understanding of Section 14?

Ms Kohler Barnard asked the candidate to spell out the various functions that the President may designate to the IGI according to the legislation. In each case does the outcome or report have to be presented to the President or the JSCI? Does the candidate believe that there are certain IGI functions that the IGI does not have to report on to the JSCI? If the OIGI issues instructions on how to resolve issues and the Ministers ignore this process, how would the candidate enforce the implementation of the recommendations? Does the IGI have access to all intelligence information and premises and would the candidate bring this information to the JSCI in terms of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act.

Dr Ndlozi said he would ask a very controversial question based on the candidate’s reliability about personal information to do with former President Zuma’s departed wife and the suicide letter. He asked if the candidate had leaked the letter to the media.

Dr Ndlozi said that leading to the 2002 ANC Conference, Jackie Selebi, then "Minister of Police", was instructed along with Steve Tshwete to investigate President Ramphosa, Tokyo Sexwale and Matthews Phosa for engaging in a plot to endanger "Zuma’s life" as perhaps they wanted to be President. Many saw this as an abuse of power. Does the candidate agree with this and what would he have done in such a case? He should come clean on which veterans encouraged him to apply for this position. He asked who those veterans are by name? He was of the view that the candidate was being recycled as he had been around and was already past 70 years old. What do we say to people who would say that the Committee was bringing in old crocs who have been in the system and who may not help to fix it. He asked for the candidate’s reaction to this.

The Chairperson said the candidate did not need to mention any names as it was not a decent thing to do.

Dr Ndlozi said it was a public platform and Parliament rules applied. What rule says the candidate cannot come clean if that is his prerogative? You are doing this for the second time and it is wrong.

The Chairperson clarified that he was only saying the candidate did not have to answer the question and acknowledged Dr Ndlozi’s point.

Ms Kohler Barnard said the Zondo Commission saw then Minister of State Security attempting to forbid the Acting Director General of SSA from giving evidence. This attempt failed and the IGI also went on to provide evidence. She asked if the candidate would have backed off as per ministerial instruction if he found himself in the same position or would have provided evidence. How would the candidate deal with the push back and aggression that comes with the position? The leaks to media have caused SSA to be on the covers of newspapers for weeks. Has this damaged the reputation of the three intelligence services or has it enhanced transparency?

Mr Mmoiemang referred to Project Avani from 2005-2007 and asked for the candidate’s reflections on the abuse of intelligence gathering identified by the IGI then. He asked about the advantages the sitting contender has?

The Chairperson asked the candidate how he felt about the interview process. He said the outcome would be communicated as soon as the process was concluded.

The meeting was adjourned.