MINISTER of Sport and ex-MK political commissioner Steve Tshwete was branded by Mr Justice William de Villiers in the SA Rugby Football Union case as a liar and an unreliable witness. Tshwete’s response was to attack the integrity of the judge in a public statement which even the sycophantic Johannesburg Star described as "far beyond the bounds of fair comment."

It was also found that Mr Tshwete’s Director-General of the Department of Sport, Mthobi Tyamzashe, lied in court, demonstrating "evasiveness, hedging, lack of candour and inconsistency" . . . his evidence at times "bordered on the ludicrous" or was "farcical."

Mandela himself did not escape. In his 1 159-page judgement, Judge de Villiers was only marginally less critical of the President, coming close to calling him a liar. Mandela’s evidence was sometimes described as "completely unsatisfactory," "subject to material criticisms." The judge said that credibility of Mandela’s evidence on a number of issues was also subject to serious doubt and some of his replies were "far fetched."

Business Day called on the new "Super Attorney-General," Bulelani Ngcuka, to prosecute Tshwete for contempt of court. The paper said: "The prosecution is important and not simply to protect the judiciary after Tshwete’s unbridled remarks about the judge who found he had lied in court. It is important to establish new rules of public criticism, particularly of the judiciary, in terms of the new constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression.

Lies remain lies whether they are told in a court of law, to the media or to one’s neighbours, friends or family. Everybody accepts that some lies fall into the category of "white lies," the kind of lies one tells to ease a social situation or to spare others pain or embarrassment. It is a mistake to confuse these awkward evasions with lies told to put yourself at an advantage over others or to escape from the consequences of one’s follies, or worse.

The lies told by the presidential spokesperson (liesperson?) to throw journos off the scent of Mr Mandela’s latest wedding were not white lies. They were a betrayal of the trust ordinary people place in a President’s word. For a trivial end, they (again) destroyed Mandela’s credibility. Not a surprise for those who recall that he was jailed for 27 years for a potentially more devastating form of deception: collusion with foreign powers to overthrow the legal government of the country, no less. He remains a liar, it seems, even after canonisation.

The lies told by President Clinton were also not white lies. He told them to save his skin, not Monica Lewinsky’s reputation or feelings. They were the basest of lies, and insulting to the American people to boot. If he survives it will be because Americans have stopped expecting their leaders to be truthful.

That, however, is their choice. We need not follow them into moral oblivion if we do not so choose. Our leaders recently, following the gang rape of the assassinated Chris Hani’s daughter, spoke with anguish about the collapse of moral fibre in SA. They should be looking inwards to find the reasons.