Mkhwebane’s chosen way was to ‘threaten and impose’, parliament hears

A boss who would only be addressed as “madam”, instilling a culture of fear and disrespect among staff, with personal agendas taking first priority – that was the atmosphere sketched on Monday by a witness testifying before a parliamentary inquiry into the fitness to hold office of suspended Public Protector (PP) advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane.

An objection by advocate Dali Mpofu, representing Mkhwebane, against Louisah Basani Baloyi’s testimony being heard – on the grounds of “irrelevance to the proceedings” – failed to persuade Section 194 committee chair Richard Dyantyi.

Mpofu argued the independent panel tasked with determining whether there was prima facie evidence of misconduct and incompetence against Mkhwebane found that the bulk of Baloyi’s evidence concerned former chief executive of the public protector’s office Vussy Mahlangu.

Led by Section 194 inquiry evidence leader advocate Ncumisa Mayosi, Baloyi – who had a nine-month stint as chief operating officer at Public Protector South Africa (PPSA) – painted a picture of Mkhwebane’s dictatorial style.

Baloyi told the inquiry how she was seen by Mkhwebane and Mahlangu as “a barrier standing in the way of them pursuing their personal agendas in the institution unchecked”.

She said there was “the culture of disrespect and victimisation in which we worked in the PPSA, under the leadership of the PP”. Baloyi had “some … disagreements with the PP and the CEO” during her short stint there.

She said: “There were some ways in which they interfered with investigations – motivated by ulterior motives in the conduct of investigations and the issuing of reports.

“The PP’s leadership style was authoritarian. She must be addressed as ‘madam’. She must be bowed down to, quite literally. “Her style of leadership was characterised by inflexibility – irrationality and a failure or refusal to treat her staff with dignity and respect.

“She fostered a culture of mistrust and insecurity within the organisation.” It was also alleged last week by another witness, Gumbi Tyelela, Mkhwebane was upset with her then spokesperson Cleo Mosana because Mosana had called Mkhwebane by her first name.

Mosana was dismissed, however fought back at the CCMA, and the office of the public protector was forced to pay her R500 000 for six month’s salary. Mkhwebane was “obsessed with eradicating the backlog”.

“Although annual targets for dealing with the backlog, among other things, were set in the annual performance plan, in monitoring the progress of the backlog, the PP imposed her own impossible and unreasonable short-term targets.

“In pursuit of this goal, she would force the executive teams responsible for overseeing investigations and the investigators themselves, to make unachievable commitments, failing which they would be threatened with disciplinary proceedings.

“The threats of disciplinary action did not permit any other response. “The PP’s way of overseeing investigations was not to hear or listen to the executives and investigators responsible for conducting them.

ALSO READ: Mkhwebane impeachment hearing: Public protector’s shady spy interviews

“Her chosen way was to threaten, impose and brook other views. In August 2019, my eight-year-old daughter was hospitalised after being diagnosed with bronchial pneumonia.

“I needed to take leave to attend to my family. The CEO refused to allow me to take leave. While I was in the hospital with my daughter, the PP called me inquiring when some reports would be ready,” said Baloyi.

Mpofu contended that Mkhwebane was deeply concerned about the backlog she found at the PP’s office when she took over.

He pushed Baloyi to explain her assertion that Mkhwebane was “obsessed” with the backlog. While Baloyi said addressing the backlog “was not a bad thing”, she refuted as “untrue” that targets against staff were set to improve delivery of services in the PP’s office.

Mpofu’s abrupt and unconventional manner of arguing, earlier caused tensions between him and Dyantyi, with Mpofu being forced to retract making mention of “favourites” and “if the shoe fits” remarks, saying he was not referring to the inquiry chair.

– brians@citizen.co.za