Mkhwebane threatens action against ‘backdoor’ impeachment inquiry

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane has threatened to take further action as the Section 194 Committee continues to dive into her evidence without her lawyers present.

An unhappy Mkhwebane excused herself from the impeachment inquiry into her fitness to hold office on Tuesday after the committee decided to hear an analysis of her testimony from the evidence leaders.

The public protector has already testified about her report on President Cyril Ramaphosa’s CR17 campaign and the South African Revenue Service (Sars) “rogue unit” matter.

‘Travesty of justice’

In her letter written to Section 194 Committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi, Mkhwebane insisted that the inquiry cannot proceed until she was guaranteed funding so that her legal team can continue representing her and argued that a postponement was “a sensible step”.

She criticised Dyantyi’s decision to allow evidence leaders to analyse her evidence, saying this was “designed to conduct a damage control exercise”.

“What was most puzzling was your unilateral and unsolicited decision to invite the evidence leaders to present an analysis of the evidence which was led by me thus far, to the committee during what has been labelled as a committee meeting but is in actual fact a backdoor inquiry thinly disguised as a meeting,” her letter, dated 4 April, reads.

ALSO READ: Committee slammed for allowing Mkhwebane’s hearing to proceed without her lawyers

“All meetings of the committee have hitherto been held with a clear agenda, reading of previous minutes and correspondence, the main issues and the like. What is currently taking place is no committee meeting by any stretch of the imagination.”

Mkhwebane said she was of the view that the evidence leaders were actually presenting their “closing oral arguments”.

“To do so when the evidence is still being led, right in the middle of the testimony of a key witness, who is still on the stand in the physical absence of me and my legal team is a travesty of justice. I am accordingly most perturbed by what is clearly a flagrant violation.

“There is nothing in any of the applicable legal instruments which allows the chairperson or the majority of committee members, to conduct themselves in such a patently and grossly irregular manner,” she argued.

She continued to say: “This is obviously grossly prejudicial, unfair and unheard of in such punitive proceedings; and to poison the minds of the members of the committee and unsuspecting members of the public against me.

“Such clearcut prejudice cannot be cured by affording me the right to refute the submissions presently being made by the evidence leaders in my absence, on some future unknown date, and only if and when the funding impasse ever gets resolved.”

‘Illegal committee meeting’

The public protector requested that the committee ceases to proceed with its work.

“I am therefore advised to demand, as I hereby do, that you or the committee must refrain from continuing with the ongoing alleged illegal committee meeting forthwith. Failure to do so will result in the taking of whatever necessary steps are available to me without any further notice to you,” she added.

Mkhwebane on Monday threatened to lay a complaint against evidence leader Advocate Nasreen Bawa with the Legal Practice Council (LPC).

Parliamentary legal advisor Fatima Ebrahim also informed the committee that Mkhwebane’s right to legal representation will not be violated if the inquiry continued with its work.

READ MORE: Mkhwebane not being denied right to lawyers, Section 194 Committee told

Ebrahim indicated that the public protector would be afforded the opportunity to “object, interject or respond” to anything raised by the evidence leaders.

She also explained that the evidence leaders were only seeking to “equip” members of the committee to ask Mkhwebane questions when it is their turn to do so.

“Anything that may be disputed, any gaps or contradictions that may arise as a result of the evidence that is being presented can be dealt with,” she said.

But Mkhwebane has dismissed this suggestion.

“The excuse that the intention of the presentation was to empower the members of the committee was false and laughable,” her letter further states.

Funding dilemma

The lack of funding for Mkhwebane’s legal team dominated proceedings at the inquiry on Monday.

She was told by her deputy, Kholeka Gcaleka, that the Public Protector’s office would not be footing her bill, which has gone over budget by R12 million.

The office previously indicated it was not liable to pay her legal fees.

This has left the Section 194 Committee with a dilemma because Mkhwebane has insisted that she was entitled to full legal representation for the impeachment proceedings as per the ruling of the Constitutional Court (ConCourt).

According to a revised programme, the committee aims to complete its work by the end of May, including adopting a final report on the inquiry.

NOW READ: Mkhwebane inquiry swallowing up Public Protector’s limited budget, Parliament told