Mkhwebane says move to strike her from roll of advocates is ‘politically motivated’

Former public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane has criticised the Legal Practice Council (LPC) of playing politics, saying she will weigh her options and respond once formally served with the application to have her struck off the roll of advocates.

This follows confirmation by the LPC over the weekend that it is moving ahead with an application to disbar Mkhwebane — almost two years after her removal from office.

According to the council, the case is based on findings from the Section 194 parliamentary inquiry, which concluded that Mkhwebane was guilty of misconduct and incompetence during her tenure as public protector.

“This report is a public document and has been reported widely in the media. The LPC has a duty to investigate serious misconduct in the public domain, in which case we do not have to receive a complaint from a specific person. Legal practitioners are officers of the court and the role of the LPC is to exercise regulatory oversight for the profession,” it told The Citizen.

ALSO READING: Mkhwebane dealt blow after Constitutional Court denies leave to appeal impeachment

Mkhwebane says she’s surprised

Reacting to the developments, Mkhwebane said she first learnt about the LPC’s intention through the media.

“The move by the Legal Practice Council to strike me off the roll comes as a surprise, especially since I am not currently practicing as an advocate. It’s concerning that they have shared information with the media without any formal communication with me,” she said.

“The timing and manner of these actions might suggest a politically motivated attempt to undermine my credibility. It’s essential to consider the broader context and possible interests at play. Yet my focus remains on defending the integrity of my work and standing by my record.”

ALSO READING: Mkhwebane criticises Judiciary after suffering another legal blow

Mkhwebane questioned both the rationale behind the LPC’s decision and the evidence being relied upon, emphasising that she is not currently a practicing advocate.

“There seems to be an implied connection between this action and the findings of my impeachment. However, I maintain that my tenure as public protector upheld the highest legal and ethical standards. It’s important to differentiate between serving in a public office and practicing law as an advocate.”

LPC denies political agenda

LPC Gauteng Provincial Director Ignatius Briel, however, said the council’s actions were strictly based on the Section 194 findings, and maintained that it was not influenced by any political agenda.

“The investigations committee made a recommendation to council to refer the matter directly to court. The council confirmed this decision in March this year. Once Adv Mkhwebane is served with the application, she will have an opportunity to present her response to court,” he explained.

Mkhwebane was officially removed from office in September 2023 following a tumultuous term marked by multiple court rulings against her, as well as calls for her impeachment. Parliament ultimately found she had overstepped her constitutional mandate and displayed bias and partiality. The process leading to her removal involved extensive parliamentary inquiries and legal challenges.

The LPC noted that the final decision lies with its national council, comprising a 23-member body of legal practitioners.

“It is important to note that the independent investigations committee (IC) and the disciplinary committee (DC) are made up of independent individuals, whose role is simply to provide recommendations/advice to the council on all matters,” Briel added.

“It is only the court which may remove a practitioner from the roll. The LPC has to apply to court and present evidence on the conduct of the practitioner – the court makes the ruling as to whether or not the practitioner is removed from the roll.”

He emphasised that Mkhwebane will get a chance to make submissions to the committees.

“All legal professionals are afforded an opportunity to make submissions to the IC and DC when there are matters against them. If they do not take the opportunity to present their side, the matters still proceed and recommendations are still made to the national council for their final decision.”

Despite the mounting scrutiny, Mkhwebane maintained that her conduct as the public protector was above board, citing she was fit to remain on the roll.

“My track record speaks for itself. I had three clean audits and numerous impactful reports. I believe I am fit to remain on the roll, based on my performance, adherence to legal standards, and the minor fraction of reports challenged in courts.”

NOW READ: ‘Forked tongue’ and vomit emoji: Niehaus slams Mkhwebane for betraying EFF