Brummer’s letter to IO Jantjies

“Charges against me are nothing but a cynical abuse of the legal system for political motives”

Decision makers turn to O!O first for what’s really happening in Eden
… You’re reading, aren’t you!?
Advertise on O!O – click here for details

Click to follow @DrewanBaird on twitter

Oudtshoorn. 25 February 2013. 08h00. Johann Brummer


25 JULY 2012

Dear Adjudant Jantjies


Our verbal discussions of 21 May 2012 in George have reference.

I have finally been able to obtain a copy of the legal opinion procured by Mills ostensibly on behalf of the Bitou Municipality. I attach a copy thereof for your reference.

Although I am in accord with much of what Adv Schmidt says, there are a couple of differences which I wish to draw your attention to. I will use his para numbering for ease of reference.

I have no knowledge of the document “Significant Aspects of Letter from JB to PA” which apparently sets out the case Mills is attempting to make. It would perhaps be wise for you to obtain a copy from him to better enable you to understand Adv Schmidt’s assumption under this para.

I am not sure that there was an MOU in 2007. There may only have been a verbal agreement at some point in 2007 or 2008 to co-operate during the run-up to the 2009 election. If there was an actual memorandum you should be able to obtain a copy from Memory Booysen.
Adv Schmidt’s presumption (“afleiding”) that the popular movement referred to in my e-mail is QMQ is incorrect. QMQ as a group came into existence only after Memory Booysen was fired by the ANC and was essentially a name adopted by a loose affiliation of people in Kwanokuthula who supported him in his successful bid to get re-elected. This affiliation came into existence more than a year after I had written the e-mail and as pointed out to you during our meeting it could not have been possible for me to have referred to QMQ at that time.

Adv Schmidt’s assumption remains erroneous for the same reasons as set out above. The “they” I refer to is not the then non-existent QMQ but various community members belonging to various different civic bodies such as SANCO, or at least a faction of SANCO, who I specifically had in mind at the time of writing the e-mail.

Adv Schmidt makes an incorrect assumption that I am referring to councillors of the ANC. The persons I refer to as “they” and “them” in this context are the same two people mentioned in my e-mail just before the extract which Adv Schmidt refers to, namely George Seitisho and Euan Wildeman, respectively the Municipal Manager and an ANC councillor at the time, both of whom had been exposed as having committed credit card fraud against the municipality.

With regard to his mention that I would aver that my reference to “civil unrest” was not an indication that it was indeed my “idee or opset” to stoke unrest. This is indeed so, I was merely making a prediction of what the community may do based on what historically has occurred, widespread all over South Africa, under similar circumstances, and of course the fact that community members had threatened to make the place ungovernable. In South Africa, public protests escalating into civil unrest and public violence has become an integral part of communication between the people and the state, especially at local government level. This is a sad fact of life today and it took no great sagacity on my part to predict that that is way events may unfold. Nothing sinister at all, just some common sense.

I am fully in agreement with Adv Schmidt at his para 5 and 6 that there is, was and never will be any prima facie evidence against me with regard to sedition, for the very simple reason that I have a deep belief in and respect for the Constitution, democratic process and the rule of law. It is very clear to me that Mill’s charges against me are nothing but a cynical abuse of the legal system for political motives and of course revenge motivated by his belief that he has lost his most lucrative client as a result of my work to oust the corrupt ANC government AT THE BALLOT BOX.

I trust that you find legal opinion and the above comments thereon of value.

Yours sincerely

Johann Brummer.

<p style="text-align:

Surprise, surprishref=””>
DREWAN BAIRD COMMUNICATIONSensaytional – 076 349 6316
Making sure they see it your way

Click here to receive updates | Advertise on O!O | Home.


4 thoughts on “Brummer’s letter to IO Jantjies

  1. Beste Johan, ek respekteer jou vir wat jy vermag het vir die DA. Ek glo ook wat daarna met jou gebeur het is skandalig. Maar wragtig dit is mos nou al lankal ‘n uitgemaakte saak dat jy Pletty is. Jy het al selfs onder “Pletty” hierop geskryf. Hulle se mos “THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL”. Moet jou asb nie verder verkleineer deur op so ‘n simpel manier jou eie stert te prys en ‘n paar goedkoop houe in te kry nie. Ek het meer van jou verwag.

  2. really guys Zille is a Thatcher wanna be, do you really…really think these guys do anything without her say? Come on , she is the puppet master!

  3. There we have it then. A nice clear response from Brummer, exposing Hardy Mills for abusing the justice system to fight his personal fights. Great stuff from a lawyer! Wonder what the Cape Law Society will say about this kind of behavior from one of their own?

    Now it is Botha and Grant’s turn to explain. Come on guys, Brummer has set a good example for you, just do it. Oh, Donald, you mustn’t lie again, because then you will get caught out again. Just tell the truth if you have nothing to hide you don’t have to lie.

  4. Firstly I question the motive for the ANC to rehash this issue now, just before elections. I also can state that the idea to make Bitou ungovernable was solely initiated from the Kwano Community leaders themselves. Though the DA did make verbal promises and consequently written undertakings to QMQ and others that they would be taken care of should elections occur( Yep, HZ herself apparently included, most definitely TB,AW,DG. ). The DA membership supported this movement fully, both in resources and financially, of this there is mountains of proof. JB is correct, it was foresight that dictated his email, as tensions were boiling over. However to lay the blame at his door is strange to say the least.

    It was the DA that supported Memory Booysen after he got kicked out of the ANC and as councillor. It was the DA that financed QMQ. It was the DA that gave the vulnerably people hope, and knowingly used them , onl;y to have them discarded like old fish after the elections.

    So who is to blame? You decide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s