10 things you need to know about the Nkandla report

Public Protector, advocate Thuli Madonsela released her long-awaited final report on the security upgrades to Nkandla, president Jacob Zuma’s private family residence.

In her briefing, which took nearly four hours, Madonsela outlined her findings and gave recommendations to Zuma and parliament.

The African National Congress elected to move their responsive press conference to this morning at 10am, while presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj is expected to also respond on behalf of government later today.

The Democratic Alliance chose to hold a press conference midway through Madonsela’s briefing, announcing plans to lay criminal charges against Zuma at Nkandla SAPS and re-instate a parliamentary motion to impeach Zuma.

The 432 page report, entitled “Comfort in Security” is available for download at https://bit.ly/OziENX

Here are 10 quick points about the report:

1. Government departments were blamed for the delay in the release of the final report.

2.  Madonsela determined that Zuma must pay back a “reasonable portion” of refund costs. An auditor will determine a reasonable amount for Zuma to refund the state.

3. Zuma did not answer all questions posed to him by the PP during investigations, which Madonsela called “sad”. She met with him in July 2013 but since he had no legal representation she could not interview him personally.

4. Police minister Nathi Mthethwa, and others, were found guilty of improper conduct and maladministration. The PP recommended ministers involved be reprimanded for their appalling handling of the fiasco. The PP believes that had ministers acted earlier the state could have saved a substantial amount of money.

5. There will be no more security upgrades to Nkandla unless they are “absolutely necessary”.

6. Zuma has two weeks to report to the National Assembly on comments and actions.

7. The state will continue to maintain the security upgrades at Nkandla.

8. Zuma told Parliament that his family built its own houses, and not the state. This was not true, according to PP. She called Zuma’s statement a ‘bona fide mistake’ but said the Zuma family “clearly benefited”. She said he “tacitly accepted and unduly benefited from investment on non-security upgrades, and should pay. However the PP stated that Zuma did not wilfully mislead parliament.

9. The visitors centre, kraal, swimming pool and relocation of neighbours “at enormous cost to the state” were unnecessary. Expenditure was excessive and a misappropriation of funds and a violation of constitution.

10. Zuma’s private architect Minenhle Makhanya assumed multiple and conflicting roles as principal agent and earned R16.5-million from the project.  This lead the PP to believe that Zuma failed to protect state resources.