Dear Editor,
I recall the President saying a few years ago, in response to questions about corruption, that accusers should bring him the evidence so that he could deal with it.
The President is now saying that he knows there is corruption in the mining industry and the incorruptible army should root it out. He gave no evidence of this corruption.
Mr Woolford of the GGMC says he is not aware of the corruption his agency is accused of.
Should we assume then, that when accusations are made against ‘Big Boys,’ evidence is needed, but if the accusation is against ‘unconnected boys’ evidence is irrelevant? Or is it that only the President is permitted to make accusations without evidence?
Yours faithfully,
Karen de Souza
Red Thread
