Attorney General (AG) Sifiso Khumalo says his office reviewed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that the country has with Google, vetted it and cleared it for Cabinet consideration.
Khumalo was responding to questions from senators, who had requested clarity on the Google MoU, noting that there were now three different versions of the matter, causing confusion among the public. One version had been presented by the Minister of ICT Savannah Maziya.
Yesterday, Khumalo quoted Section 77(7) of the Constitution of 2005, which states that, subject to other provisions of the Constitution, any agreement, contract, treaty, convention or document, by whatever name called, to which government is a party or in which it has an interest, shall not be concluded without the advice of the attorney general (either personally or through authorised officers acting under his instruction), except in cases and under conditions prescribed by Parliament.
He emphasised that the responsibility for reviewing MoUs lied with his office, as provided for in the Constitution. He confirmed that his office had vetted the MoU.
Khumalo clarified that the MoU was non-binding between the parties, explaining that it merely signified an intention to possibly enter into a binding agreement in future.
“I confirm that we have seen the MoU, vetted it and cleared it for Cabinet consideration. It was taken to Cabinet after being cleared. This is not the first time I have explained the MoU in the Senate, as I have also addressed it elsewhere. It would be improper for me to claim that I am not aware of the MoU when I signed off on it and cleared it,” he said.
He added that the matter was deliberated upon in Cabinet, which was chaired by the then substantive prime minister.
He reiterated that the MoU had been reviewed, vetted and cleared for Cabinet’s consideration. Khumalo further noted that the Government Policy on Agreements (2018) requires that all agreements be submitted to Cabinet for collective endorsement.
RELATED | We signed Google agreement – Commerce Minister
He said senators might have misunderstood the prime minister, maintaining that both the report and his explanation were accurate. Senator Tony Sibandze had asked the AG to clarify the matter, noting discrepancies between reports.
He said the ministry of ICT had provided one version of events, while the prime minister’s office had provided another, and the prime minister himself having given a different account during a Parliament debate.
He asked the AG to clarify the issue and stated that MoUs and agreements were generally drafted or reviewed by his office and should not proceed without its involvement.
Senator Siphelele Mkhonta said the minister responsible had indicated that Cabinet was aware of the Google deal, as the MoU had been signed and deliberated upon, leading to its adoption.
However, he noted that during his office’s portfolio debate, the prime minister presented a different version, stating that the country and his office were not aware of the Google deal. He said the PM had further stated that the minister had travelled privately and returned with the MoU. According to Mkhonta, the prime minister said he had engaged legal experts to review the MoU, who found no substance in it.
He said this was on record, adding that when they later read the responses from the prime minister’s office on the same matter, a third version emerged. This version indicated that Cabinet had discussed the Google issue, but due to concerns raised by senators, it would be investigated further.
“Faced with three versions from the same Executive, I propose that, to bring finality to the matter, if Cabinet did meet and discuss the issue, the MoU and the minutes of that meeting be tabled, regardless of who was chairing at the time. The minutes will clarify whether this was indeed deliberated upon in Cabinet and help provide a clear picture to the public,” he said.
