Corruption busters win Travelgate ruling

Parliament has disclosed the names of MPs implicated in the Travelgate scandal thanks to efforts of the Grahamstown based Centre for Social Accountability (CSA).

The 89 MPs named for the first time this week allegedly owed more than R5 million to Bathong Travel, one of six agencies that went bust because of the alleged fraudulent activities of certain public officials.

Their names had not been released before, despite calls for their identity to be revealed. However, this week, following an earlier landmark judgment in the Grahamstown High Court, details about Parliament's purchase of Bathong's debts have at last been made public.

MPs named
On the list of those who allegedly owed money to Bathong are State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele, Correctional Services Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, Women and Children and People with Disabilities Minister Lulu Xingwana and Deputy Police Minister Maggie Sotyu, as well as a number of other prominent officials.

Releasing the names on Wednesday 10 August, Parliament also issued an official statement saying that as the lists related to civil claims, those whose names appeared on them were not necessarily "criminally culpable individuals", and "in many instances members were not aware that the travel agent had used their names to commit fraud against Parliament".

Fight for information
In March 2009 the CSA launched a request to Parliament for access to information about the names of the MPs involved with one of the travel agencies that went bankrupt as a result of the scam.

The centre used the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), which allows anyone to request information from the state. Parliament refused to release the information, arguing that it would amount to the unreasonable disclosure of personal information.

Following the refusal, the CSA brought an application to the High Court last October asking that the court reconsider parliament's decision not to supply the information.

The decision that resulted in the release of the names was delivered by Judge Sytze Alkema in the Grahamstown High Court. In his decision, delivered early in August, Judge Alkema ordered that the information be made available within 10 working days.

The ruling was welcomed because even though the scandal dates back nearly 10 years, the identities of most of those implicated had remained a mystery.

About CSA
The CSA is an independent institute affiliated to Rhodes University. The centre also runs the Public Service Accountability Monitor Programme (PSAM) whose aim is to improve public service delivery, people's rights and the progressive realisation of constitutional social rights.

"The CSA does training in accountability throughout Southern Africa" says Derek Luyt, head of media and advocacy at PSAM.

This is not the first time that the CSA has taken the government to court. Following the Eastern Cape's 2006 provincial Rapid Assessment Survey of 12 200 households, which examined residents' perceptions of government performance and service delivery, the government did not release the report, saying that departments needed to engage with the findings before any information was released.

The CSA believed that the information should not be withheld, as the research had been carried out with public money, and the matter was taken to court. The ruling favoured the CSA and the information was made available.

"Powerful message"
Luyt says that the centre is pleased with the judgment and believes it has sent out a powerful message, but he adds that he is also sad that it was necessary to take action in the first place.

"It's a bittersweet victory. It's not a victory for the country, and it's not a victory for democracy."

Luyt also said "Parliament has acted irresponsibly with tax payers' money". As a result, there is still a concern that Parliament would not recover the money, and that the taxpayer would be left to carry the burden.

Nicole Fritz, executive director of the Southern African Litigation Centre, fully supports the judgment. She believes that "an open and transparent government" is a key element in the rule of law.

In this case, Fritz said, the court had held Members of Parliament to account, making it clear that abuse of privileges, as it had been alleged, was not protected by the right to privacy. In so doing the case "also contributes to a strengthened constitutional government".