The High Court in Pretoria on Wednesday set aside the findings of 2016’s Seriti commission looking into the controversial 1999 arms deal, with costs.

This follows an application from two civil society groups, Corruption Watch (CW) and the Right2know Campaign (R2K), to have the findings of the commission declared null and void.

Judge President Dunstan Mlambo was scathing towards commission chair Judge Willie Seriti for what he called for the “manifest failure” of it to hold those responsible for the arms deal accountable.

Judge Mlambo noted the significant amount of tax-payers’ money spent at the commission, which was reported in June as being almost R140 million. According to Judge Mlambo, the commission failed to inquire fully into the matters that it had to investigate. “The questions posed to the witnesses were hardly the questions of an evidence leader seeking to determine the truth,” Mlambo said. READ MORE: Arms deal money could’ve built 2m low-cost homes

He also said it had refused to look at a case in which the state took action against former president Jacob Zuma’s financial advisor at the time the arms deal took place, Schabir Shaik.

Judge Mlambo also found that one of the commission’s witnesses, controversial businessman Fana Hlongwane, was “treated generously” by the commission and allowed to “ramble on” at the commission, with his statement requiring further investigation, particularly when it came to R60 million allegedly paid to him.

Mlambo said the court is fortified in their view that the inquiry the commission was called upon to undertake “never materialised”.

He said a key failure to test evidence of important witnesses, and a refusal to take account of documentary evidence which contains the most serious allegations that were important to the inquiry, means the findings of the Seriti commission must be set aside.

The commission, set up in 2011 by Zuma, found no evidence of corruption in the deal, in which the SA government entered into contracts with several European defence companies in 1999.

South Africa bought sophisticated military equipment to the tune of R30bn.

The commission did not hold anyone accountable, finding that there was no undue influence in the selection of bidders.

At the time, Zuma said the commission also found that there was no evidence of bribery or corruption in the arms procurement process – particularly in the selection of bidders and costs.

Zuma claimed: “The commission states that not a single iota of evidence was placed before it, showing that any of the money received by any of the consultants was paid to any officials involved in the strategic defence procurement package, let alone any of the members of the inter-ministerial committee that oversaw the process, or any member of the Cabinet that took the final decisions, nor is there any circumstantial evidence pointing to this,” News24 previously reported.

Former president Thabo Mbeki and former ministers Trevor Manuel, Alec Erwin, Mosiuoa Lekota and Ronnie Kasrils were some of the witnesses who testified at the commission.

READ MORE: Ramaphosa takes ‘neutral stance’ on arms deal application

The commission noted that, except for the Lead-In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) programme, the inter-ministerial committee had accepted the results of the evaluations produced by the technical teams and recommended to Cabinet, and the preferred bidders identified by the technical evaluations.

Reasons were given for deviations in decisions.

The commission also found that the arms deal was indeed needed by the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) and was well utilised.

The civil society groups argued that the commission was a whitewash, failed to consider the evidence and that its resulting findings, which were released in 2016, should, therefore, be set aside.

Seriti’s commission misled the public and exonerated politicians and public servants of wrongdoing relating to the arms deal, the two groups argued.

According to another civil society group, Open Secrets: “The failure of the Seriti Commission was largely about its failure to call European arms companies like BAE and French company Thales to account – despite evidence in their own countries that they had paid bribes.”

In June, President Cyril Ramaphosa’s office first said they supported the two organisations’ application to have the findings of the commission set aside, then clarified that they meant to take a neutral stance.

The commission investigated allegations of fraud and corruption in the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages and exonerated everyone implicated.

State legal advisor Advocate Nazeer Cassim said on June 13 that the presidency supported the court application, which claimed the findings were flawed and riddled with unfairness.

READ MORE: Review of arms deal commission’s findings starts

Cassim told the High Court in Pretoria that the presidency was not opposing the court application to review and set aside the April 2016 findings by the commission.

Presidency spokesperson Khuselo Diko, however, later clarified that “the presidency has adopted a neutral position on this case, electing to abide by the court’s decision”.

“What advocate Cassim said was without instruction from the presidency and he admitted same to court himself.”

She said the presidency had never said the inquiry had not done its work properly, nor had it authorised Cassim to.

“Our view is that if the court agrees that fairness is the standard, it should set aside the findings,” she said.

The commission was tasked with investigating a range of matters in relation to the arms deal which included investigating whether there had been any irregularities in the awarding of the arms deal contracts and whether there was any corruption in the deal.

(Compiled by Daniel Friedman. Background reporting, Gcina Ntsaluba)

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.