The Friedemann innitiative, Aikona.

[H. erectus]

Good day friends and forum members,

Being a green activist and in the run-up thereto, I have been privileged to meet many others like me, yet differing from the outset. Membership details on different media platforms will speak for itself!!!

Why, that not the point in question, just perhaps a good situation for now.
The Aikona group of concerned citizens have put forward a proposal, this under the auspice of Friedemann Essrich, his capable communication skills quite notable. He offered we join their plight when he submits a letter of discontent at the level of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). The idea being, stead always a singular discontented approach, rather perhaps create a broader front,... differing media platforms with a common goal!! A greater/broader front of discontent! The idea here being to attach names and I suggest even more, names participation from different media platforms.
I will take the opportunity in forwarding some of the communication between ourselves, relating to his attempts at finding some resolution, that be,.....

Dear Tienie,

Thank you for your comments and the references to specific legal cases.

For now, I am following up with the DEA regarding my comments on the
mistakes and the obvious bias shown by the Minister.

I agree that we should consider filing a formal complaint with the PP's
customer service department for failing to provide meaningful feedback
and evidence of progress made with the investigation.

I am involved in a complaint against the Tlokwe local municipality which
has also seen nothing but delays, handovers and empty promises ever
since being filed with the PP in June 2014.

Before submitting a complaint, we should perhaps consult with Nigel,
Gerhard, Rouen and Fred, who have been cc'ed on this e-mail.

Best regards,
Friedemann Essrich


On 2017/11/29 09:29 AM, Tienie Fourie wrote:

Good Morning,

I am shocked. In terms of condition 18.8 there is now no time limit within which the traffic impact assessment must commence and be completed. I agree with you that this points to bias in favour of the developer. I fully understand why this is so, The minister has said on a number of occasions that national parks should be hubs of economic development in the regions of the parks so that jobs will be created.This is not the purpose of our parks.
In her letter she says that an extension was requested on 22 November 2017 and that this came to an end in April 2017. The first date is clearly wrong . It should be 22 November 2016. It shows that she put her signature to a letter which does not make sense.It is furthermore due to her gross negligence that the domestic trade in rhino horn is now legal. People believe that the Gauteng High Court, the Supreme Court of appeal and the Constitutional Court legalised the trade.
This is not so at all. She imposed a moratorium on the trade. Before she could have done so she had to place an advertisement in a newspaper circulating nationally inviting interested and affected parties to give input. She failed to comply with this peremptory provision and it was because of this failure that the three courts held that the imposition of the moratorium was unlawful and set it aside. When the Gauteng High Court made the order, she applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal which was refused. Thereafter she applied to the Constitutional Court which also refused leave. It should have been clear to her that there was no hope that she would get leave but she persisted at the expense of the taxpayer.
She made another blunder. When the North Gauteng High Court ruled that the moratorium was unlawful and set it aside, she went public and said that she would reintroduce it. This was a foolish thing to say.. Before she would have been entitled to reintroduce it, she would have had to place the advertisement in a newspaper circulating nationally inviting interested and affected persons to make representations. After receiving such input she would have had to consider all the representations and would then have had to decide whether, based on the representations, she should reintroduce the moratorium.
When she went public and said that she was going to do so, she in effect gave notice to the two farmers who were in favour of the domestic trade, that no consideration would be given to their representations. She was therefore in no position to reintroduce the moratorium, because if she did so, it was inevitable that it would be set aside once again I think it shows that the minister and her legal advisers do not understand the legislation with which they must comply.
We are still left with Mr Maphosa,s failure to give progress reports. Section 181 of the Constitution creates " State institutions supporting democracy" One of these is the Public Protector. In terms of section 181 ( 2 ) the PP is independent and subject to the Constitution. In terms of section 182 ( 4 ) " The public protector must be accessible to all persons and communities. "It follows that these provisions also bind members of the PP,s staff such as Mr Maphosa. It seems to me that Mr Maphosa is now inaccessible to us. He does not respond to emails and I have never been able to get hold of him when I phone.
In terms of section 6 ( 4 ) ( ii ) of the public protector act no 23 of 1994 the PP is competent to investigate any alleged discourteous conduct or undue delay by a person performing a public function. Mr Maphosa performs a public function and so did the previous investigators. There has been an undue delay in producing a report so it is ironic that the very problem which has to be investigated by the PP occurs in her office. Furthermore is the position not that the failure of Mr Maphosa to respond to email inquiries is discourteous?
Section 195 of the Constitution reads as follows: " 195 ( 1 ) Public administration must be governed by democratic values and principles enshrined in the Constitution, including the following principles: ( a ) to ( e ) not relevant for present purposes ( f ) Public administration must be accountable; ( g ) Transparency must be fostered by providing the public with timely, accessible and accurate information. "
The Public Protector and Mr Maphosa are bound by these provisions. I do not think that Mr Maphosa has complied. We are not getting any feedback about progress and we also do not get any information.
I refer to the following passage in the judgement of The President of the Republic of South Africa; the Deputy Information Officer; Office of the Presidecy and the Minister in the Presidency vs M & G Media Ltd which was delivered by the Supreme Court of Appeal on 14 December 2010.
I quote: " Open and transparent government and the free flow of information concerning the affairs of state is the lifeblood of democracy. This is why the Bill of Rights guarantees to everyone the right of access to " any information that is held by the state " of which Ngcobo J said the following in Brummer v Minister of Social Development: " The importance of this right.....in a country which is founded on values of accountability , responsiveness and openness cannot be gainsaid. To give effect to these founding values, the public must have access to information held by the State. Indeed one of the basic values and principles governing public administration is transparency."
I mentioned earlier that it may be an idea to approach the human rights commission about our problem. The HRC will however not entertain a request for investigation before internal remedies have been exhausted. The PP has a customer service department which in my view, will have to be approached first. My problem is that I have already complained to the person in charge of this section, a lady by the name of Busisiwe, who promised feedback but did not provide any.
I think you should perhaps consider to write to her on behalf of AIKONA. If you decide to do so you are welcome to quote my views about the legal position verbatim. I do not want to sound pessimistic but my past experience with the HRC was not good. It seems to concentrate mainly on racial and service delivery issues. The email address of customer services is customerservicesat pprotect.org.
Kind Regards.

Dear forum members,
Much water has flowed beneath the bridge!! As you may understand me posting more relevant info regarding Friedemanns effort, will only be more complicating and long winded. I will gladly try answer question that may arise.
To make a long story short, it’s all about getting the message, of discontent, across at authority level by means of numbers. Your input will be appreciated.

Best regards,..
H. e

[Richprins]

Ok, what do we need, H.?

[H. erectus]

RP,...
We need people that are prepared to put forth their name,
regardless the difference of opinion, attachable too the
document that Friedemann wishes to submit. Preferable
participation showing from which media platform. You will
understand my drift here RP,.

[Flutterby]

I thought Aikona didn't want to be associated with us.

[H. erectus]

I have often pondered about this situation, Flutts and you are probably quite correct. As I have mentioned before, it is very notable to see how many folk are on a mission of their own regarding conservation matters. Also the structures at Aikona sometimes have me thinking, however let that be.
Fact is more than often we find ourselves side by side contesting issues of common interest. Not always do I have much faith in arguments presented however I do appreciate these for whatever impact they may have. I uphold this respect for the sake of conservation. Friedemanns attempt being of similar design that has me questioning a success rate and will try explain why.
Currently I am reading a book, authored by a well known journo, explaining the political mess that this country finds self in. A legal backlog of mammoth proportions, yet somehow this effort needs to be brought to book if for the records only and therefore Friedemann will have my support. Too my mind the more names he gets the better and especially the more differing media platforms these names come from, will be even better.

[H. erectus]

I may add too above, please read Rogers thread, Mhalobo's rhino poacher "mate"...
very well described in this very book.