Thabani Masuku on Tuesday defended his client, Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane, against Minister of Public Enterprises Pravin Gordhan’s attempts to interdict her report finding him guilty of violating the constitution in connection with the so-called Sars “rogue unit”.
Gordhan lodged an urgent application to suspend and interdict the remedial orders by the public protector, citing “improper motives” on her part.
Masuku argued in the High Court in Pretoria that by granting the interdict, the court would be interdicting accountability; refusing the interdict would not negatively impact on Gordhan’s review application, which would assess the report on its merits.
The court is, therefore, being asked to prevent ministers from being held accountable and to place restrictions on institutions tasked with enforcing the constitution, Masuku further argued.
Masuku then mentioned insults made by Gordhan in his application for the interdict.
He described some of the allegations made by the minister as “scandalous and vexatious”.
According to the lawyer, Gordhan’s submission was an assault on the office of the public protector that would weaken it, rather than strengthen it should it succeed.
READ MORE: Court hears that Mkhwebane ignored Gordhan’s efforts to respond to her findings
In the papers, he said, Gordhan referred to Mkhwebane as “legally illiterate”, which he said amounted to an attack on her character.
According to the lawyer, Gordhan has attacked the dignity of Mkhwebane and the authority of her office, and granting the interdict would serve as an endorsement of these insulted.
Masuku also said that the dismissal of Gordhan’s application is necessary for upholding the separation between the different branches of government.
He said a chapter 9 institution could not be interdicted from its work simply because a minister did not like the manner in which he was investigated.
Gordhan’s legal representative, advocate Wim Trengove, argued earlier on Tuesday that Mkhwebane had a reputation of not giving some parties implicated in her investigations a chance to respond before finalising her probes and making adverse findings.
“That includes not only Gordhan, it also includes the president, the minister of police, and the national director of public prosecutions,” he said.
Trengove said Gordhan was entitled to respond in connection with every aspect of the adverse finding against him.
“We submit the public protector was required to afford Gordhan and others a hearing,” he argued.
(Compiled by Daniel Friedman. Background reporting, ANA)