Last week, we published a superb piece written by UCT Prof Pierre de Vos in which he REMINDS ZUMA that no one is above the Law and the Constitution. This was written in the light of the Menzi Simalane verdict and now, as then, we take the opportunity to state the following:
Red subheads added by MyShtetl to contextualise similar wild insinuations causing the continuing fracas in the relationships between communal leadership and MyShtetl.
The difference in our case, of course, is that we don't know why we're in the dog-box for but - but if hearsay is correct, we believe WE hold the evidence that nobody wants to see.
BULELANI NGCUKA, SA’s first National Director of Public Prosecutions and husband of our previous deputy-President, last week found himself, his wife and ex-President Mbeki publically bearing the brunt of very serious allegations by the new head of the Special Investigations Unit, Judge Willem Heath. The vicious and so-far unsubstantiated attacks on Nguka, were so uncalled for and unsubstantiated that the media have unanimously called for Heath to decline the appointment.
As with last week’s piece by Prof de Vos, this in itself makes for riveting reading. And also as per last week, it draws many parallels with the position between the communal leadership and MyShtetl. Once again please note that contextualisation we have inserted is in red type, while Mr Nguka’s open letter to Judge Heath is in black type.
As Dennis Davis says: "Judge for Yourself!"
An open letter to Advocate Willem Heath
Dear Advocate Heath,
On many occasions I have remained silent when outrageous and scandalous allegations relating to my term as National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) were levelled against me. I deemed it prudent to let such issues be dealt with by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) as it deemed fit.
However, because the source of the latest allegations is someone who was once a member of our respected judiciary, and is considered by a section of our society to be a crusading "corruption buster", I consider it necessary to respond.
Kibbitzing and koching are Jewish pastimes, normally best ignored too. But when the “source(s) of the latest allegations” are respected members of communal leadership it is best to settle such issues. We would like to, they clearly don’t.
By not responding in such circumstances, there exists a danger that the public may place credence in your allegations, clothed as they are with the imprimatur of the office of head of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU).
Also, as you are a former judge of the high court, the public has every reason to believe that your statements will not be reckless, unethical and unsubstantiated.
It is also because your interview published last Sunday is so scandalous and lacking any ethical content that I have been reluctantly compelled to respond by means of an open letter.
Similarly, while we are told in no uncertain terms that there are “charges” against us, but no one will admit they exist and we are not granted a meeting to engage on same, we have no other means of defending our good name against the onslaught but to open the whole silly situation to the community.
The allegations you make against me personally, and the office of the NDPP during my tenure, are very serious. They include the scurrilous charge that I allowed myself and the NPA to be dictated to by the former president [Thabo Mbeki] in the exercise of my authority, to institute corruption and rape charges against President Jacob Zuma.
Evidence of such conduct as you allege on my part would result in a criminal conviction. One wonders why, if you have such evidence, you have not seen fit to formally lay charges against me in all these years. The reason, in my considered view, is that these allegations are as false as they are disingenuous.
Of course, in our case we are the ones accused, but of what, we only have conjecture and rumour to go by. Should the issues be the issues that we understand from the hearsay, then in our case it is we who have the evidence and proof, we just don’t have anyone who wants to see it.
You suggest that as a result of your "exclusion" from the investigation of the strategic defence procurement package, the joint investigation conducted at the request of a committee of parliament by the NPA, the auditor-general and the public protector lacked integrity.
Save and except that you did not personally participate in the investigation, it is unclear why these constitutional institutions are visited with this insult.
To us, it is (equally) unclear why any communal institutions would consider that we have insulted them. Of course, if they told us what was the matter, we would at least be able to understand what’s eating them.
If you had any evidence of wrongdoing that came "too close to certain people," why did you not present such evidence to the joint investigation? Why indeed. If we have offended anyone, please advise accordingly.
Could it be that you withheld evidence of wrongdoing simply because you were sulking at what you misguidedly perceived as "exclusion"? Could it be that a refusal to meet and offer evidence is because none exists? Could it be that that which we may bring to the table could embarrass whatever secret assertions have been levelled at us?
It is a matter of record that your term of office as head of the SIU terminated as a result of a decision of the Constitutional Court, which correctly found that it was undesirable that a full-time judge should be engaged in investigating matters of the nature of those the SIU is charged with in terms of its founding legislation.
An unbiased reading of the decision will show that it is intended to protect the integrity of judicial office whose main constitutional mandate is to dispense justice on a day-to-day basis, and avoid the danger of our judges being seen as an extension of the executive. There is no question that the investigative functions of the SIU are typically those of policemen and related functionaries.
It is understandable that you were frustrated that you could not continue in office as a result. But that is the nature of court decisions, and as a former judge and advocate I would have thought it would be an easy matter to understand this.
The allegation that I was "instigated" to prosecute President Zuma is demonstrably false and is a gratuitous insult to my person and the office of the NPA. It is rejected with contempt. The undisputed facts around this matter are to the contrary: I declined to institute any charges of corruption against President Zuma. I stand by that decision. That I was in any way involved in the decision to institute rape charges against President Zuma is equally astounding, as I was at the time long out of office.
Tra-lala-lala. I will make no explicit reference to our stand-off (and risk embarrassment to anyone) other than to say that, if the hearsay is any good, the above reflects exactly my contemptuous rejection as (barring the issue of rape) it seems that we can change the characters and circumstances – but the (purported/reported/hearsay) claims are similarly insulting and just as patently disingenuous.
One, however, understands that a man so bitter at being "excluded" from office and, being rendered a pauper as a result of such "exclusion", would be blind to the facts and be inclined to lash out at all those who he misguidedly perceives to have conspired to his prejudice.
Therefore, now that you have been restored to the position you have consistently believed is your G-d-given right to hold, you triumphantly return to take revenge against me, my wife, and former president Mbeki, by resorting to the perpetuation of slander, innuendo and defamation. That there is no basis for the allegations matters not to you, as your mantra appears to be that such conduct is justified by your objective of vilification and destruction of those you see as your enemies, real or imagined.
Tra-lala-lala and ditto to our previous remark. It is an uncanny, mirror image with a few changes in the furniture.
The latter modus operandi is again in keeping with your style. In the interview in which you announced your triumphant return as SIU head, you unashamedly state that you traipsed to former president Mbeki's office to "whisper" in his ear that you had information of wrongdoing relating to the arms deal.
Heath must surely recognise that if he had evidence of wrongdoing he was wrong in not presenting it. My detractors too.
From this "confession" it becomes obvious you had been involved in some preliminary investigative work on the arms deal, from which you would have gathered the need for a proclamation to be issued by the president authorising an investigation. The question that must occupy the public is on whose authority such a preliminary investigation was conducted?
I ask this question because it is nowhere authorised in the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act for the head of the SIU to unilaterally decide to initiate an investigation extraneous to the mandates of an existing investigation.
Parliament has in its wisdom seen it fit to grant the power to institute an investigation, and to decide who heads the SIU, to the president and to him alone. That is still the position. It is therefore something to remember in the course of your triumphant ride into town, that it is not a good thing to arrogate to yourself the decision to conduct any investigation that you deem to be necessary in the public interest.
Forgetting this aspect may lead to you falling hard from your high horse once again, and lead to another round of finger-pointing and slander from you. Our public discourse on the serious matter of corruption surely deserves to be spared such a spectacle, you will hopefully agree.
Is this the case with us? Has someone jumped the gun, acted on a long-harboured grudge about something and by engaging in finger-pointing forced us to respond (to what, we don’t even know) in yet another public spectacle? Eventually, all of this secret finger-pointing will have to come to an end as we can’t and won’t be silenced.
At least not until we are told what we are accused of and given a hearing in our defence. Thereafter, if are deemed to have done wrong, we will be the first to publically admit that we have done wrong. And apologise. And make amends.
As a man of professed integrity, known for your dedication to the eradication of the scourge of corruption that is threatening to destroy the very fabric of our democracy, I invite you to produce the evidence of the very serious allegation that I may have been bribed to abuse my office. The same invitation is extended regarding my wife, the former deputy president of the republic.
You will, I trust, not let our democracy down in this regard. There is now no more reason for you to sulk and withhold such evidence. I also hope you will be willing to take the witness stand, testify on oath regarding any such evidence as you may have and subject yourself to an examination of the truthfulness of your allegations.
Do not let the community down. We have faced abuse from our users for insisting that our communal leadership is democratically elected – most recently after both the Fed and Board elective conferences.
We won’t be silenced by being ignored! We have our own audience, in their thousands and thousands. Almost each and every one of them Jewish South Africans. And they are growing in number and frequency of visits rapidly. Those users who are not in SA are either ex-pat South Africans or Jewish orgs in the countries where ex-pat South Africans live. As in the case of Mr Nguka (although he at least seems to know what he is accused of), we cannot stay silent in the face of such behaviour towards us.
Are you withholding your allegations from us because, as in the wisest of words from Nguka above, you fear having to “subject yourself to an examination of the truthfulness of your allegations”?
I await a clear response and reserve all my rights regarding the allegations you made against me.
Yours sincerely, Bulelani Ngcuka
Yours sincerely, on behalf of tens-of-thousands of Jewish South Africans, Ant Katz
Let us first establish who
Let us first establish who are the leaders of our main communal bodies that could be involved in MyShtetl's ongoing travails and then we will postulate why:
Board of Deputies: Zev Krengel, president and former chairman with Mary Kluk now chairman.
SAZF: Avrom Krengel, chairman. The current president is [Hi David, I am sure you knew that there would be a lot of red marks on this!] not even worth mentioning.
Gauteng IUA/UCF: Avrom Krengel, co-chairman.
Essentially, MyShtetl is up against the abuse of power and monstrous uncontrollable ego backed up by weak [Sorry] who don't have the courage to stand up for what is right and for justice. This disgusting activity unjustly destroys people's names, reputation and is Halachically sinful. One has to add that it is from people who wear kipoth all the time.
In my opinion and experience, [leader(ship)] sees himself as more important than freedom, democracy or the rule of the SAZF constitution, and this would apply to any other communal body he is involved with. I believe he thinks the SAZF exists solely within his being. He is no democrat. Whilst I was a national vice-chairman, there were no executive committee meetings, no discussions per phone or in person, no consultations and no respect whatsoever or real acknowledgement that there are elected members on the SAZF committee. No democracy. Nothing!... and I believe this is still the situation and it will be as long as he is chairman, or raises himself to president or is involved in any way.
I was elected by the SAZF conference almost five years ago. [leader(ship)] didn’t have to like me, but he and the rest of his committee, the blind and cowardly rubber stamps they have proven to be, had a constitutional and democratic duty to send me notices of meetings, minutes and keep me fully informed. I wrote to [Sorry] and never received a reply, not that I was surprised in the slightest.
[leader(ship)] is no democrat. His national president should have guided him and corrected him, but owes his elevated titular position to him, although I mistakenly nominated him at the time, and in my opinion is quite amorphous.
I am reminded of TS Eliot’s poem, The Hollow Men, every time I think of these people:
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death’s other Kingdom
Remember us—if at all—not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.
Read this poem again and see how well it applies.
When [leader(ship)] and his allies don't get their way, they resort to bullying, shouting [Sorry]. (I can provide a letter Werksmans sent to me just before the last SAZF conference threatening me as proof and much much more) – And why the intimidation? Because he is a dictator and autocrat [I’ll allow that but only as you have been on committee together] and all that implies and because he was [Sorry] and knew that for the first time ever he would be called to book, challenged and have to face up to it, not that it happened within the choreographed conference with no opportunities to really speak, as usual under his chairmanship.
[Sorry] [leader(ship)] accused me, via his attorneys, of bringing the SAZF into disrepute. Why should I have done so when [leader(ship)] and his cronies were doing such a wonderful job doing so all by themselves?
To paraphrase Mark Anthony, I don’t come to bury the SAZF and I do not intend to praise it either.
However, democracy and what is right is on our side, as it is on MyShtetl's side. My mere existence made me a target of these self-serving persons, all of whom demand we stop exercising our rights to free speech.
This applies in particular also to MyShtetl as well and it is interesting how the current "leadership" is aping what is happening with the South African secular press and the ANC-led government.
The truth is we don’t need the SAZF, the Board or IUA/UCF in the context I am writing about. We can operate on our own, be good Zionists on our own and fight for our community and Israel on our own, although, it would obviously be better to stand as one Am Yisrael.
By default, [leader(ship)], sadly in my opinion, is once more chairman again. However, the SAZF conference needed a public commitment from him, which was not forthcoming or even thought of, that full democratic rights and behaviour will be adhered to and fully respected at all times.
That there will be executive committee meetings with the allocation of portfolios to members of the executive. That the SAZF will be run completely on democratic lines and that Management Committee (Mancom) meetings will not be filled with choreographed nonsense that consumes all the time available and achieves nothing, [in fairness, David, this may have been done – unless you know otherwise] leaving [leader(ship)] to go on his merry dictatorial way. I am calling on him to make such a public commitment with no caveats or fancy sidestepping.
Will this happen? I doubt it. [leader(ship)] is very good at ignoring challenges and requests and ostrich-like, burying his head in the sand hoping it goes away and that events don’t kick him in the posterior. The media does tire of issues and they do often go away. However, you will notice with the [leader(ship)], that with their “management” style, things crop up again and again.
As with MyShtetl, strength to their arm, we, LikudSA and myself at the SAZF conference, didn’t cave in to their demands and intimidation. We never will.
We need the sane and determined support of our community for the reform and betterment of the SAZF and the Board of Deputies, as well as the governance of the IUA/UCF. Our community needs to work together, to think together, to strategise and plan how we will defend our community and Israel against the ever escalating insidious attacks against us.
We need to appoint leadership we can have faith in who will carry out our policies and our instructions over the next term of office in our communal bodies, who need to understand that they have a responsibility to the community and those who elected them, rather than to their own desires, ambitions and egos. We need a leadership that do what has to be done and certainly not for the kavod.
As long as we do not have wise, intelligent, brave, resourceful and democratic leadership, we cannot effectively deal with our enemies. We need to manoeuvre with prudence and calibrate our moves with caution. We need to practice responsible and intelligent leadership.
If I had to rate [leader(ship)]’s tenure as chairman, I would give [leader(ship)] an “F”. Why an “F”? – Because you cannot get a “G”. As for the amorphous [leader(ship)] of the SAZF, I would fail him outright.
[leader(ship)]’s approach, if one can call it that, has had several malign consequences. He clings to [Sorry]. This is undemocratic, anachronistic and dangerous. Unsurprisingly, some newcomers, finding themselves on the SAZF committee and opposing him, have found themselves scorned, have left and their talents, contributions and inputs lost forever. This happened to me and to others I can name.
The single worst aspect of [leader(ship)]isation is its impact on our community.
We can now see where that road leads: to a fearful, compliant and sycophantic, and at times arrogant, and incompetent bureaucracy. This leads to a huge loss in interest and active participation in the SAZF, the Board and other communal bodies and their affairs and will lead to many more conflicts and increasingly less support for Israel.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when he thinks there is no need or necessity to understand it. Of course you know who I am referring to here. So it is with Zionism. The less adult supervision, leadership and direction, the more our children think it is correct and fashionable to follow the currently fashionable conventional South African thinking and therefore the less they will support Zionism, Israel and our community.
How aptly a new generation will apply this thinking against their own people. They will combine with others to subject us to thinking foreign to Zionism and to our people. Our people, Israel and our community deserve better and I know we all expect better.
We cannot let our community and Israel down. Instead of resisting, is our community accepting what is imposed on them? Israel has always identified and defended a worthwhile national purpose.
Unity will not be achieved unless a new leadership emerges and puts the interests of our community and Israel above their own considerations, ambitions and egos.
My comments, whilst directed in description above at the SAZF, apply equally to the Board of Deputies. The [leader(ship)]isation of our community, in my opinion, has sadly weakened our communal bodies. Will they be able to recover?
To paraphrase the Torah, the sins of the leaders are visited upon their followers and inheritors and it will take exceptional leadership and change of direction to make it right, otherwise it will be visited on the next generation of leaders and then the next until there is nothing really left. I hope this does not come to pass and that this will not be so. It doesn’t have to be and the power is in the hands of our community.
Leave MyShtetl alone!... and for real Goodness’s sake and the sake of our community and Israel, may the era of the [leader(ship)] Brotherhood end soon.
Hello David. I have done what I had to save you receiving another Werksmans letter. FYI – I was checking Google keywords earlier with the CSO (fear not, nothing to do with you) but what was interesting is that the third most typed-in phrase that led searchers on Google to MyShtetl in the past 31 days was “David Hersch”! It could mean that you and/or SAIPAC are making waves which Yids want to read about, or it could be your friends at the Orgs or Werksmans keeping their beady eyes on you. I’d venture the former. Regards, ANT
Me again, David. I have taken advice from a trusted friend with many years of communal leadership under their belt who is at pains to point out that ‘leaderships’ are jointly responsible for, and complicit in, all the acts of leaders. I think that is the point you were trying to make too. So I have de-personalised it and re-edited in green. Play the team and not just the captain. -ANT
Well, well, well. My Shtetl
Well, well, well. My Shtetl really seems to bring out the best in our community. David, you are a star. Should I start collecting for the court case? I always envy people who say it better than I. Where can I send my donation?
Similarly, dear Anthony, it
Similarly, dear Anthony, it will come to pass that the powers that be in the community will no longer be and you will still be there. They owe you an apology, but hell will freeze over before they do so, unless serious pressure is brought to bear, but by whom?
I have read what you wrote and the similarities or parallels in your case and Nguka's case. The powers that be, obviously, as David Hersch points out, are all guilty and cowardly. It is a clear abuse of power. I wonder how long our community will tolerate these weak self-serving "leaders"?
I have read on Myshtetl time and time again complaints against the brothers Krengel. The pattern repeats itself from year to year, from crisis to crisis, from demeanour to demeanour. How long are we going to tolerate this and when will we as a community stand up? Are the provincial bodies that make up the national bodies so weak, weak-kneed and afraid to speak up? Can this be good for our community?
In reply to Chaim above, none of these so-called leaders will touch David Hersch as he speaks the truth and I doubt very much if they would expose their dirty washing to public scrutiny and be shamed. Wish we had more like David.
Fear not Anthony, right is on your side and so are the majority of our community in this country. Don't for one second think that the brothers are particularly liked by most of us, They are not!