I can’t help feeling sorry for Carl Niehaus. Not that anything can excuse the man’s behaviour, but you have to understand where he’s coming from. Niehaus spent his early adulthood in jail for his anti-apartheid convictions while the rest of us were getting started in life, accumulating wealth, property and building our careers. When he came out, he had nothing — no job, no money, no property, no experience of running a household or a bank account. He wanted the high life. That was his downfall. And so he got into debt and the whole, sad story unfolded.
The Mail & Guardian exposed it on Friday. The weekend newspapers followed with barely concealed delight. Schadenfreude is thick in the air. The Sunday Times led with Niehaus’ attempts to wriggle out of paying rent for his luxury Midrand pad (and appointed him “mamparra of the week”); Sunday World revealed that he had been arrested and spent a night in jail after failing to pay a R70 000 bill at Sun City.
Niehaus is a public figure; he lied and cheated; he deserves to be exposed and pilloried by the press. Yet … in their unseemly haste to kick Niehaus while he’s down, aren’t the media missing the real story here? In 2005, while he was chief executive of the Gauteng Economic Development Agency (Geda), Niehaus, according to the Mail & Guardian, forged the signatures of the Gauteng Finance MEC Paul Mashatile and three other MECs on a letter promising businessman Pierre Swart favourable treatment from the Gauteng government on property transactions in return for a personal loan. Niehaus soon had a crisis of conscience and confessed to Mashatile, who asked him to resign. This ended his seven-month career at Geda and he moved on to an executive position at Rhema Church.
Forging politicians’ signatures and offering a favour to obtain a personal loan is not only fraud, it is also corruption. Niehaus solicited a bribe and promised a quid pro quo. The fact that he didn’t deliver, and appears not to have received the money, makes no difference. It’s still corruption. And Mashatile, now Gauteng premier, became complicit in the corruption when he swept it under the carpet rather than taking action against the perpetrators. I use the plural advisedly, because it takes two to commit corruption. Niehaus asked for a bribe and somebody offered to pay it.
Niehaus was never more than a party functionary. His career has been destroyed, as it should be. But Mashatile is a powerful politician who has been spoken of as a possible successor to Finance Minister Trevor Manuel and Swart’s company is still in business, for all we know with the Gauteng government. So why aren’t the news media jumping all over those two rather than trying to outdo each other outdoing each other trying to humiliate Niehaus?
PS. Today’s edition of Business Day kind of gets the point about the Niehaus story: that it is about more than just dishonesty by one individual. But the newspaper is wrong when it says that Niehaus “had tried to defraud the Gauteng Development Agency in 2005″. He had, in fact, solicited a bribe from a third party in return for a promise of favourable treatment from the Gauteng government. That is corruption, which makes the Gauteng government’s handling of the issue even more dubious.
PPS. This posting also appeared on my personal blog, Low Opinions.
I was with Carl at the then RAU when a handfull of us opposed apartheid but also thought of the ANC as a communist organization. It took me many years to understand why he joined the ANC, and when I read his book “Om te veg vir hoop” I could finally understand where he came from and the price he paid for his convictions. I respect and admire what Carl did in the anti-apartheid struggle, but he has disappointed many of us – we did not expect this type of behaviour from the young idealist that we remember from the late 70′s
Strange, this reluctance to follow the (private) source of the proffered bribe!
C’mon M&G! Don’t let us down, please! YOu’re not going to leave this to Noseweek, are you?
Hilarious (and so revealing) the way onse Carl moved on smartly from being caught in corruption to an executive position in a church. How appropriate. The biggest crooks are never far from the sanctuary of a church!
(Bless ya and halleluja George Bush. PTL*. Expect to see photo-opportunities of Zuma attending church services up to 22 April, too.
*Praise the Lord, Pass the Loot).
The real story is that Carl Niehaus confessed to committing fraud, lying and deceiving many people. The attempt to elevate Paul Mashatile’s complicity to be more serious than Niehaus’ criminal activities based on the prominence (or lack thereof) of the positions they hold within the ANC, is flawed. Both these two are seasoned political activists and are in many ways the face of the ruling party and speak for and on its behalf on a range of issues including crime and corruption. They are in equal measure culpable of the things they are said to have done or neglected to do (and the in the case of Niehaus, the things he confessed to). They must be charged for their respective roles in this sorry saga.
I cannot however discount possible political machinations whose aim is far beyond Niehaus; and in the case of Mashatile, collateral, but necessary victim of a much bigger scheme designed to claim the scalp of factional opponents in a round-robin elimination contest. Who will be the last man standing?
I am getting sick of this Niehaus stories. After his financial problems, we get to hear that he lied about his Doctorate degree in Holland and….and….
He says: “..the ANC is my family, they are my friends….”
An old saying: “tell me who your friends are and I tell you who you are..”
Could the reverse be true?
Niehaus’s accumulation of so much schadenfreude is directly proportional to his sniffy, haughty, holier-than-thou manner when addressing anyone who wasn’t quite as deeply involved in the so-called “struggle”. Hubris is much heavier than lead, as he’s busy finding out. Serves him right, I say.
Thank you for an excellent insightful piece. Please comment more often on many different matters; it is seldom that these Thought Pieces are analytical and point out ‘the real story’. They unfortunately play into the emotion of the matter. Well done, and many more to come, I hope.
I understand that many comrades are ‘damaged goods’ after spells of torture, solitary confinement etc. But why do they all ssem to share one trait: BLING BLING.
Whether it’s comrade Tony and Allan’s love for snazzy suits,shoes for comrade Jakie, or comrade Carl who aspires to live in some absolutely ridiculous mansion………laughable.
@Robert
I can’t help but feel certain sections of the population are feeling very sorry for Carl Niehaus including you Robert. You said so.
I keep thinking to myself, Carl has done things worse than Zuma in a lot of respects. He committed fraud and has confessed to it. He was a head of an organization and was caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He forged signatures and has confessed to that too. Zuma, on the other hand, was still soliciting for a bribe from what we understand so far. And yet, a HUGE section of our population is already cutting Carl a lot of slack. I wonder why!!!
Both these men have allegedly committed criminal offences. One of them has actually confessed to it. And yet the public seems ready to crucify one and to feel sorry for the other. I smell a very big rat here. Our morality is warped.
Carl Niehaus – Chair Parliamentary Select Committee on Correctional Services
Very ironic if he is ever convicted…
Chris – I know many people who also worship bling – who live in mansions, drive luxury cars and wear designer clothes – but who are not “comrades”. Nobody thinks that is laughable.
JOn, KC – I’m not defending Niehaus – he should of course be held accountable. I’m just saying that he’s part of a larger problem.
Why does everything add up to R70 000. I have no sympathy for a man that spends R70000 on a holiday for a few days.Its absurd and distastefull when half our nation is unemployed thanks mainly to the ANC’s policies.
I simply do not buy this nonsense about Niehaus being unable to manage his affairs honestly as a result of being in the ‘struggle” – a pathetic excuse at best!
Some people, and I am sure we all know one or two (and there appear to be a huge number within the ANC!), are recognised by honest people as likely to lie and cheat in everyhting they do – they live their lives and deal with others in a dishonest manner in pursuit of material gain.
This man is one of those – and all the excuses in the world make no difference to his guilt.
I feel sucks for Niehaus. I’ve known many people who suffered in the struggle (including my own cousin) and none of them came out of jail with this urge to lie, over and over and over again. Remove the red herring of the struggle and the religious stuff, and this is what you realise: there are two kinds of people in the world, the innate con artist and the person who can’t handle being dishonest. The latter might occasionally tell an important lie, but will wrestle with his conscience about it for a long time afterwards. The former just can’t seem to get through life without swindling. Lying becomes an art form – along with the kind of ducking and diving and begging and pleading Niehaus relies on. “My sister died… I’ve had chemotherapy…” jees, people, how could you fall for those lines, they were using them back when the Pyramids were being built! I’d be willing to bet that, had Niehaus not gone to jail, had he not been part of the struggle, he’d have shown some of these characteristics. He seems to fit some of the criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder:
Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;
Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;
Reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations.
I am disappointed by what you have written, Carl Niehaus us a Crook, fraudster and should not be spared at all. The mand presented himself as being holy in front of the nation. If we start deminishing the importance of these kind of behavior we are sending a wrong message. For the ANC to try to protect the man it is even more scandolous than what he did.
Afte all are we amzed that he is corrupt or all decend folks in SA know that you will not be an ANC top man unless there is something in your closet. Show me one person in the NEC without some sort of a shaddy story. Punish with inpunity all the crooks and fraudsters
So what’s the diference between Carl and Zuma? They both (oops allegedly in the latter case) accepted bribes for favours? And whats the difference between Carl and Chippy Schaik, they both lied about the degrees and doctorates they do not have in order to gain position or contracts to manage a toll road and produce “credit card” driver’s licences?
Travelgate, municipal contracts, shady and favourable property deals, contracts to build power stations etc etc etc. You ANC nothing yet!
Lets get them out before we end up as yet another basket case on the dark continent, thanks to Eskom.
Apparently the DA had now laid charges against all the names persons. Just heard it on Cape Talk.
Crooks through and through what is ANC all about corruption come on anyone with morals and ethic and honesting election date has been set its now time to turn the tables, se need honest and ethical people running this country not a bunch of corrupt officials who don’gt believe in the people and their needs!
The struggle credentials are beginning to wear a little thin.
Hope many more voters than in 1994, 1999 and 2004 will understand.
Carl Niehaus, like many in the ruling party, has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. This is just the tip of the iceberg. In the immediate future, the country will have, as its president, a man suspected of high crimes including obstruction of justice in violation of the constitution he swore to uphold as deputy president and will be required to do so as president.
What a shame that our rulers have turned out to be nothing but dishonest opportunists out to enrich themselves at the expense of a people that has bestowed its trust and goodwill upon them. What a cruel betrayal of a cause that saw so many sacrifice life and limb for the liberation of our country from, among other things, the stigma of being ruled by men and women who were morally and ethically challenged beyond imagination. Little did we know that corruption flows in the veins of oppressor and oppresssed, employee and deployee and self-proclaimed heroes who have turned out to be a curse to our well-being and progress.
Whether it’s Carl, Joost, JZ or the SAA crew, these acts are all fallout from a society that has become oblivious to the consequences of their criminal acts.They/we know that we will probably never have to account for them in the traditional sense, ie prison and a criminal record. They may suffer publicly, but thats all. SA society is practically lawless, and the impact on our collective psyche is evidenced through these people an many nameless others
David, Noko, Winkie, Stewart, Bonginkosi – I think you misunderstand me. Read the second sentence of my posting. I am not trying to justify what Niehaus did.
Bonginkosi – Niehaus is a party functionary, not a public representative. Zuma is the President of the ANC, and will be president of the country soon. There is a big difference between the two. Niehaus should surely pay for committing fraud and corruption. So should anyone else.
I understand that you are not trying to justify Niehaus’ actions Robert. However I do not accept that “you have to understand where he’s coming from”.
Fact is understanding changes nothing – his crimes and misdeeds remain crimes and misdeeds and should be dealt with accordingly.
Maybe I am an ‘old testament’ type of guy, full of fire and brimstone rather than love and forgiveness, but part of the problem in the world is just that sort of ‘relativism’ when ‘absolutism’ would have served better as a moral compass in the past 70 and more years.
I know black when I see it,I know white when I see it (absolutism) and have little time for interpretation of shades of grey (relativism).
I understand your impression of the real story being ignored. And as much as this is largely a fault of our increasingly lethargic fourth estate; I fear that moving too quickly off of the issue with Niehaus may be lending itself to a worse situation.
I fear that we would be allowing him space in which he can imagine that what he has done is little when compared to those who were tasked with reprimanding his behaviour.
I don’t deny that they Gauteng Finance MEC should be duly charged himself; which has happened yes? But I believe that much like using fire to smoke out rats; so Niehaus and his half -truths and lies should be used to expose any and all who may be involved with him. Whether hoping that the NPA is playing that game is naïve or not is another questions altogether.
Albeit, an interesting perspective on the matter. You should write more hard news; we could do with some original thought patterns in our headline stories.
“Not that anything can excuse the man’s behaviour, but you have to understand where he’s coming from,” that’s supposed to indicate that you condemn out of hand his behaviour? It doesn’t work for me. “Not that anything can excuse the fact that this man killed his wife and family, but you have to undertsand, he spent his early youth on the Border”; “Not that anything can excuse the fact that he raped and brutalised this girl, but you’ve got to understand that he himself was the victim of boarding school abuse…” My whole point, really, was that by calling for understanding on the basis of what he went through, you trivialise the struggles of those who went through very similar things and managed NOT to become pathological liars and swindlers. Just as saying we must understand violent crooks because they’re poor and have no opportunity, for me, trivialises and reduces the nobility of my friends in informal settlements who manage to survive and do good things with their lives through it all.
Believe me, I did psychology and I was around at the time Niehaus went through is difficult time. I had a father who spent years starving as a POW, a brother who spent months inside Angola and was deeply traumatised, and a number of friends and acquaintances who suffered deeply in and out of apartheid’s prisons during the struggle. Niehaus makes me so angry because the dignity with which all these people coped and came to terms with their lives is belittled when people use his experiences as a “you must understand”. Past trauma does not excuse present crime.
@Winkie…my parents were in the resistance against the German occupation during WW2. Lots of stress with 5 children and another 5 resistance workers in a small Dutch home. Discovery would have meant execution.
After 1945: no lies, honesty, no stealing, no stories. They just worked hard to get over the setback of years of family life lost.
The only blot on my mother’s record: she tried to commit suicide shortly after my father died. Loosing her lifelong “bodyguard” was too much.
Luckily she survived and lived till the tender age of 97.
IMO, the excuses for Niehaus’s behaviour are unacceptable.
Money and the consumer junk associated with the money economy has given rise to the worst possible fetishism. Advertising has given rise to all kinds of fantasies associated with commodities whether they be MacDonalds burgers or a pair of shoes or a packet of cigarettes. “Fantasy arising from desire deceives the fetish worshipper into believing that inanimate object will give up its natural character in order to comply with his desires” (Marx). Niehaus the theology student, who was unable to complete his degree because of his arrest and imprisonment in 1983, became a fetish-worshipper, a follower of fashion, where he previously sheepishly worshipped the lamb of God, he now just as sheepishly wished to become part of the ruling class.