Crawford-Brown has no M/E credibility

Allan Wolman

Crawford-Brown is the man who took on the South African government on the arms deal that according to him “almost bankrupted” him. Indeed a noble cause and all credit to Crawford-Brown’s continued vigil in seeking justice about an issue that has plagued the public domain for so long.

Now here’s a man who quite obviously feels so deeply for South Africa that he will fund his own legal battle against an all-powerful government. We know that legal costs can be more than crippling, and this illustrates his commitment to justice and the betterment of our country. Well, some might question his sincerity?

Now here’s a man steeped in the political landscape of our country. He has clear knowledge of the abysmal state of education, healthcare, housing, Eskom, labour issues and the list goes on and on about the real and daunting problems that threaten the very fabric of our society.

Now here’s a man ready to risk his financial security in court to seek justice and eradicate the scourge of corruption, so we need to ask why he stops there. A man so committed to a cause, but then turning his back on the real problems of this country and focusing his energies on an issue so far from our shores that one must question his sincerity in his first endeavour. Was there an ulterior motive?

Now here’s a man who obviously believes strongly in a legal system with a high respect for the integrity of the law. Well, only certain legal systems and where he sees the opportunity to gain by it. 

He was secretary of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine, a “tribunal in the general sense is an institution with the authority to judge, adjudicate on, or determine claims or disputes”. A legally constituted body imbued with all precepts of legal procedures.

Now here’s a man, who as secretary of this august tribunal, when approached by interested parties to call for cross-examination of the “invited” witnesses, simply refused the request – no cross-examination allowed in his kangaroo court! A tribunal with only invited witnesses, by the way, and a man with well-documented biases against Israel, a country accused by this tribunal.

Now here’s a man with obvious respect for the law but who turns that law on its head to suit his particular agenda and who rewrites legal precedent by not only denying cross-examination at a tribunal, but only “invites” witnesses for the prosecution and then disallows counter-argument.

 Rosebank