When Politicians Waive the Rules


by Hannes Wessels

I think I’m right in saying that fundamental to the success of Western civilisations through history has been the successful application of the rule of law. Maybe it does not need repeating but in the current context maybe it does; without the rule of law, chaos leading to anarchy is normally not far behind. I think it is also true to say that laws really only function effectively when they are respected by the majority of the people on whom they are imposed, and that requires sensible legislation and fairness in the application and enforcement of those statutes. And for laws to engender respect nobody should be above them.

Very soon after independence in Zimbabwe, when most people were in a state of something close to euphoria, because then Prime Minister Mugabe was making all these wonderful conciliatory noises about there being a bright future for us all in a country where race would be irrelevant, I was an early sceptic.

The reason for this was I had my eye on the murder trial of Edgar Tekere, then a cabinet minister, who took it upon himself to go and murder Gerald Adams, an elderly white farmer after a lunch with Mugabe and the late President Samora Machel. There was little or no disputing the facts and Justice Pitman, who was highly respected, had no qualms in reaching a guilty verdict.  However, this was overruled by his two assessors on the highly questionable grounds that the accused was acting in ‘good faith’ because he genuinely believed he had protected the security of the state by killing this defenceless old man. This signal event troubled me deeply and I feared this was an indication that the country was on the slippery slope to lawlessness and ultimately self-destruction.  Sadly, I was right.

Eighteen years later I watched with great interest, the impeachment proceedings that bedevilled the presidency of Bill Clinton following the Monica Lewinsky affair. The charges had nothing to do with sexual ‘adventurism’ in the Oval Office involving Ms. Lewinsky, but everything to do with ‘lying under oath’ and thereby involving himself in the obstruction of justice. There was absolutely no doubting the facts but as in Zimbabwe, politics interfered, the Democratic Party rallied, and Clinton was acquitted. He walked free from a prosecution that would have resulted in the imprisonment of virtually every other citizen; and with that, America took a step closer to Zimbabwe and the systemic failure that has been the ruination of so many of the countries of the Third World.

The trend continues.  Only now are the facts emerging surrounding the endemic lawlessness of the Obama administration: the apparently illegal spying on the Trump campaign and the ‘Russia Collusion’ investigation which, it is now clear, was based on a phoney dossier compiled on behalf of the Hilary Clinton election campaign. Obama, Biden, CIA chief Brennan, Intelligence chief Clapper, Attorney General Holder and many other senior officials all appear to have used ‘law enforcement’ to advance a political agenda. Through abuse of the legal process that some have called ‘treasonous’, they almost crippled the tenure of a duly elected president. Whether or not, they will be called to account remains unclear.

In the United Kingdom, similar signs of selective application of the law have appeared, where it seems the rules vary depending on race, religion and political affiliation. As a result, Pakistani Muslim ‘grooming gangs’ ran  rampant in British cities, under the noses of the constabulary, but with impunity.   They belonged to a minority group, which, in the climate of obsession with race victims (blacks and ethnic minorities – the oppressed), rendered the responsible authorities fearful of being accused of racism so they ignored the crimes.  The fact that virtually all the victims were white (the oppressors), made it easier for them to look the other way.

Belatedly, after rising outrage at these double-standards, some action was reluctantly taken to investigate the perpetrators.   But only when the trial of one group of suspects commenced were we witness to the full force and wrath of English law enforcement. This was visited upon Tommy Robinson, who had the temerity to video these men on their way out of court, resulting in his summary conviction of contempt of court and immediate imprisonment. Tommy, of course is white, and is labelled ‘far-right’ because he espouses ‘traditional’ British values, and therefore guilty of most ‘crimes’ even before being charged.

But here in South Africa, unfortunately, it appears we are well ahead of Britain and America in twisting the law to pursue a dubious agenda. A recent post I read chronicled some of the alleged crimes involving high-level, fraud, corruption and theft, that have occurred since the transfer of power to the ANC twenty-five years ago. I was left gutted.

Since the advent of ‘democracy’, well over 200 serious and well documented alleged crimes involving, I imagine thousands of ANC officials and their associates, have been well investigated and publicised. In the process, God alone knows how much money has been stolen but it runs into the hundreds of billions and I don’t think even the ANC dispute that. Despite this litany of brazen criminality, I know of only one successful prosecution; the conviction of Schabir Shaik, by Justice Hilary Squires, in June 2005 on several counts of fraud and money laundering involving his friend and business associate, Jacob Zuma. Shaik received a lengthy jail sentence but after a short stint in a prison hospital he was released on parole and has lived happily ever after.

So, in post-apartheid South Africa, not one person has effectively been punished for reducing the country to penury. However, under the new regulations promulgated as a result of the ‘pandemic’, NPA statistics show over 15,000 people have been arrested for violating the rules of confinement and over 12,000 dockets have been opened.

The person initiating and directing this ridiculous regimen is Mrs. Dlamini-Zuma, who, as Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, oversees the Disaster Management Act; the umbrella legislation that permits the ‘lockdown’.

This is the ex-wife of the man who tried to sell the country’s assets and pocket the proceeds, who was accused of lying to parliament and who has been at the centre of power throughout the entire ‘State-Capture’ process. It looks to me like the laws of the land have now been weaponised, the country is under arrest and the good guys are on the wrong side of the bars.

About the Author

Highly respected, Writer, Blogger, Wildlife Conservationist, Hunter and Father.......