Suspended public protector advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane. (Photo by Gallo Images/City Press/Tebogo Letsie)
Suspended Public Protector (PP) advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane, who is currently not backed by a legal team, is gearing up for a final showdown when she takes the stand for the second time at the parliamentary Section 194 inquiry.
Evidence leaders Nazreen Bawa and Ncumisa Mayosi have been taking the committee probing her fitness to hold office through various court rulings, which invalidated Mkhwebane’s reports.
These included the CR17 report into President Cyril Ramaphosa’s ANC leadership campaign finances and one about the role of former SA Revenue Service (Sars) commissioner Pravin Gordhan into the Sars “rogue unit”.
Mayosi said among key questions Mkhwebane would have to answer during questioning by evidence leaders and MPs, included: -Giving an explanation on what evidence she had showing Ramaphosa knew that Bosasa boss Gavin Watson paid R500 000 into a trust account named EFG2; -Providing evidence which prompted her to find that Ramaphosa did not become aware of the Bosasa donation to his campaign, after his response to former DA leader Mmusi Maimane; -Explaining why she failed to interview Ramaphosa’s son Andile, against a background of unproven allegations that the Ramaphosa family had an improper relationship with Bosasa (now African Global Operations); and -Giving reasons why she extended her investigation into the alleged breach of the Executive Ethics Code by Ramaphosa.
READ MORE: Committee slammed for allowing Mkhwebane’s hearing to proceed without her lawyers
A desperate Mkhwebane was barred by committee chair Qubudile Dyantyi from addressing the “committee meeting” – objecting to what she said were “unconstitutional proceedings”.
“You are out of order and please ing in any of the applicable legal instruments, which allows the chairperson and the majority of committee members, to conduct themselves in such a patently and grossly irregular manner.”
Struggling to get funding for her legal team, Mkhwebane said the Constitutional Court ruled that even judges were “entitled to full legal representation during a hearing held by the Judicial Conduct Tribunal… mute her,” was the response from Dyantyi to Mkhwebane.
Mkhwebane later tweeted the contents of the letter she wrote to Dyantyi: “What is actually happening is that the evidence leaders are 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, I therefore, see no reason why Chapter 9 institutions office bearers should be treated differently.”
ALSO READ: Mkhwebane threatens action against ‘backdoor’ impeachment inquiry
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
