Thank you, hon Speaker. South Africa's foreign policy is informed by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the country's value system, especially our commitment to democracy, human rights, justice and the wellbeing of all. Our primary objective on the UN Security Council will be to contribute to the promotion of these values. We also remain firmly committed to the promotion and protection of human rights across the globe.
Membership of the UN enables us to contribute to promoting these goals as well as the protection of multilateralism and the respect of international law. South Africa, like the rest of the international community, is concerned about the human rights situation in Myanmar. We are consistent in our support for the consideration and discussion of human rights matters with regard to the Myanmar issue in relevant UN bodies, including the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. We have also supported the work of the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy in Myanmar and the efforts of the Association of the South East Asian Nations aimed at assisting Myanmar to resolve its challenges.
The issue of Zimbabwe is currently not an agenda item in the UN Security Council. Hon members would be aware that the Southern African Development Community, SADC, and the African Union are attending to the Zimbabwean matter, and South Africa is part of that process. Thank you, hon Speaker.
Speaker, what the President has said now is not substantiated by what our country did when we voted for and in support of countries that undermine human rights. The world was shocked when South Africa cast its first vote as a nonpermanent member of the council to block a resolution condemning Myanmar for flagrant human rights abuses.
Our country also voted against smart sanctions against Zimbabwe, in spite of the political violence and human rights abuses perpetrated by the Mugabe regime. As many hold the view - in spite of what the President has said - that South Africa has betrayed its own Constitution that upholds human rights, can the President assure this House that what he has just said about concerns for human rights will be substantiated by the way we vote in the UN Security Council? Can the President assure this House that, when issues of human rights and issues of countries that are undermining the rights of the citizens are raised - including Myanmar, Zimbabwe, North Korea and the others - South Africa would not side and vote with countries that are defending those that are undermining human rights? [Applause.]
Speaker, I've just stated South Africa's position, unless the hon member disagrees with what I said regarding the position of South Africa. I said very clearly that our position is very clear when it comes to human rights.
There are examples that the hon member cited; amongst them, Zimbabwe. I think the issue of Zimbabwe has been discussed in this House many times, and we have stated our position on that score all the time. You know the position of the region and of the continent with regard to Zimbabwe.
We gave here, I think over the years, elaborate explanations about our attitude towards Zimbabwe and what we are doing in Zimbabwe, which is different from the attitude of those who were shouting and doing absolutely nothing on the Zimbabwean issue. We have been working hard to help our neighbours as a country and as part of the SADC region.
So, I think you can't just post the issue of Zimbabwe in a huge basket because we have been dealing with that issue. The fact that Zimbabwe is where it is today is because of our contribution in solving problems. Otherwise, there would have been more difficulties. That is accepted by everybody else in the world. Thank you, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr President, Msholozi, I'm also addressing myself specifically to this issue of Zimbabwe. I seem to see that, in my own assessment, there is a factor which I believe is missing in the process that we also engaged in - a factor which I also believe is vital to a future settlement in Zimbabwe. So this may sound like a question, Mr Speaker, but it is also a matter of saying: Mr President, look at that angle also.
My question is this: Is the President contemplating utilising his visit to the United Kingdom as an opportunity to create, open or establish a direct dialogue between London and Harare in order to revisit the Lancaster House Agreement, particularly on the question of land? I believe this is extremely critical for the future settlement, Mr President.
Thank you, hon Speaker. Well, South Africa has engaged with the British government over the period ever since the Zimbabwean issue. As you know, Britain took a position of applying sanctions, which includes not talking with the Zimbabwean authority. We have been raising that issue as a country and as a region. Our view has been: In order to resolve the Zimbabwean question, lift sanctions. We should be open to the possibility we are talking about so that the British and Zimbabweans could talk on this specific issue of land you referred to. The land issue caused the deadlock during the Lancaster House time, but the British have stuck to their views and position.
Those are matters we have been discussing with them, including the decision of SADC in its last summit to send a delegation to the global institutions and countries to deal with the question of lifting of sanctions. That is the matter we've been engaged in all the time, but, of course, the British have not moved. Thank you, hon Speaker.
Thank you very much, hon Speaker. Hon President, in light of the recent release of Aung San Suu Kyi, who is recognised as a champion of free political activity and human rights in Myanmar, and the recent elections that were condemned by the international community as a sham, does the South African government recognise the recently elected government in Myanmar? What is the government's position in this regard? I thank you.
Hon Speaker, thank you very much. Firstly, I don't think we give ourselves space to be judges of other people or to judge situations. Certainly, the release has been welcomed because we believe that there must be free political activities. The people of that country must express their views freely and take decisions.
How the systems work in the end is the business of those countries. What we would not like is for people to be arrested for their political views. That is what we are against because that is part of the rights we believe people should exercise. Therefore, regarding how they conduct their elections, if we have the details of how the elections were conducted, and if those details reflect that the elections were not free and fair, then, as you know, the entire world will condemn them. However, if they conduct their elections and people believe that they were free and fair in terms of their system, I don't think we would want to give ourselves space as judges to judge other people. However, we are very happy that people have been released. Thank you.
Thank you, Speaker. Hon President, the Department of International Relations and Co-operation promised that membership of the UN Security Council would present an opportunity to promote the African agenda and contribute to achieving peace and stability on the continent and in all regions of the world.
Within the context of your answer with regard to the SADC region, Minister Sisulu said on 17 November 2010:
President Zuma is in touch with the coalition government in Zimbabwe and constantly on top of the situation.
She said -
I believe we have moved them in the right direction.
Within that context, I would like to ask the President to take us into his confidence with regard to the issue of the political relations between President Mugabe and Prime Minister Tsvangirai, which are, at this point in time, at an all-time low since the SADC region meeting in August.
What are the plans that the President and the government are implementing to try and mitigate or intervene in the situation? That kind of relationship is very important in resolving the situation in Zimbabwe, as well as in ensuring that the implementation of the 24 Global Political Agreement, GPA, issues is taken very seriously. Furthermore, that kind of relationship is important for President Mugabe to ensure that he adheres to the terms of the 2008 GPA. That is basically my question, Mr President. Thank you.
Hon Speaker, on the issue of Zimbabwe, the Minister was correct. We are in dynamic contact with the situation in Zimbabwe because, partly, South Africa has been put by SADC as the facilitator and, therefore, we are always in contact.
The last SADC summit adopted a road map to implement the GPA, which was accepted by all parties in Zimbabwe. This road map was mapped by the facilitator. There are specific things that are expected to have happened by now.
However, there were developments of a political nature that caused problems in Zimbabwe. We immediately moved in to interact with the leadership in Zimbabwe. In fact, a few days ago at the latest members of the facilitation team were in Zimbabwe to address specifically those issues.
As part of a troika, we will be giving a report to SADC countries which are meeting as from tomorrow evening in Botswana. We will be giving a report and making some recommendations, from our point of view, of what needs to be done. So the matter is indeed under constant attention. Thank you, hon Speaker. Position regarding reconciliation of statement by President with 2010 State of the Public Service Report
24. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) asked the President of the Republic:
How does he reconcile his statement in which he expressed satisfaction that the Government was tackling corruption with the 2010 State of the Public Service Report in which it is reported that the Government is unable to account for at least two thirds of the cases reported to its National Anti-Corruption Hotline?