‘Playing for time’ – Mkhwebane trying to hold on until term of office expires

Suspended public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s impeachment proceedings were yesterday postponed to 30 January, winning her nearly two months as the Section 194 inquiry into her fitness to hold office continues to drag on since it first met on 12 July.

It was a short day for the committee yesterday, as its last witness for the year meant to testify on behalf of Mkhwebane, Zambian public protector Caroline Zulu-Sokoni, was unable to do so.

Mkhwebane’s advocate Dali Mpofu said Zulu-Sokoni had not yet been able to get permission to testify at the hearing as she had just been nominated as a judge in Zambia, which expedited her being called as a witness earlier.

Zulu-Sokoni would prefer to testify in person, as the processes for her appointment as a judge may take longer than initially expected, he said, noting she would be able to testify in January.

Zulu-Sokoni said she was only recently informed that she would be appointed as a judge and told she would have to notify her government that she would testify before the SA parliament as a “courtesy”.

Mkhwebane ‘trying to hold on’

Legal expert Dr Llewellyn Curlewis said that Mkhwebane was trying to hold on until her term of office expired in October 2023, which meant she wanted to “retain all her benefits and would still be regarded as fulfilling her ‘employment contract’. Then they may just as well continue and finalise”.

“They are playing for time. If the matter is not finalised by the time she completed her period in office, she will receive her benefits regardless of the outcome.”

ALSO READ: Mkhwebane inquiry: Mpofu accuses chair of trying to put witness through ‘Spanish Inquisition’

When asked why Mkhwebane did not cut her losses, Curlewis said the suspended public protector would lose all perks should she be unceremoniously removed after a recommendation by the National Assembly.

“The perks – every possible fringe benefit she negotiated in her contract of employment – and pension for life are probably the most important.

“It depends on contents of contract. Unfortunately, that is privileged information.”

On 15 November, Mkhwebane pleaded with the Constitutional Court to allow her to complete her seven-year term in office, telling the apex court that she in October entered the final year of her nonrenewable seven-year term as public protector.

Zulu-Sokoni, who would testify for the African Ombudsman and Mediators Association (Aoma), estimated it would take three weeks to get the required approval for her to testify in South Africa.

“The approval is required whenever a government official has to travel out of the country.

“Even if I was not applying to travel abroad, I would have to inform the government I am addressing the South African parliament. It is a courtesy to my government,” she said.

“You must get authority, even to go on holiday. Those are our procedures.”

Mpofu told the committee that, should Zulu-Sokoni remain unavailable at the end of January, a replacement witness from Aoma would be found.

No extension will be given

Committee chair Qubudile Dyantyi warned there was a deadline for the committee to finalise its work. He also noted that they would allocate the witness in the current programme.

“No extension will be given. We will have to do our best to allocate this witness back in the programme.”

However, Mpofu asked who had set the deadline and said the committee must account for itself and the way it has conducted its hearings.

“Who are they? Who has told you you can’t go beyond a particular date?”

Dyantyi replied: “We have to account. This is not a stand-alone process. It is a parliamentary process.”

NOW READ: ‘Are you going to tell us what to wear?’: Mpofu slams inquiry for saying Mkhwebane must appear in January