The South African arms deal case has been dragging on for two decades.
Now rights' groups Corruption Watch and Right2Know's application to review and set aside the findings of the Seriti Commission of inquiry into the arms deal is heading to court on Tuesday and Wednesday.
This was the second application to have the commission’s findings set aside.
To discuss this court case, Ray White speaks to arms deal researcher Paul Holden.
If you look at the Corruption Watch and Right2Know papers, fundamentally, the critical issue of the litigation is, did the Seriti Commission investigate this issue with an open and an inquiring mind? Did it go after every lead that it had? Did it try to gather the evidence that it had?— Paul Holden, Arms deal researcher
He says based on the conduct of that commission, it is clear that the commission didn't pursue evidence and when evidence was given to it, the commission was unsatisfactory in testing that evidence.
Holden adds that there were a considerable number of people implicated in the arms deal when he submitted to the commission.
In the end, only two people directly accused of corruption were called, and they were barely questioned.— Paul Holden, Arms deal researcher
Holden says this application is essential for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, it means that people like former president Jacob Zuma can't rely on the Seriti Commission as proof of their innocence. And it allows law enforcement agencies to re-open investigations into the arms deal and it important for the rule of law.— Paul Holden, Arms deal researcher
Listen below to the full interview: