Mkhwebane ‘steered’ investigator’s findings on Vrede dairy farm project, parliament hears

In yet more damning testimony on embattled Public Protector advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane, parliament on Thursday heard how she made a phone call to an executive manager expressing her desire to avoid adverse findings into the multimillion-rand Vrede dairy farm project under her investigation.

Her remarks were understood to be a bid to influence the outcome of a report that would exonerate the Gupta family and Free State government officials implicated in siphoning off public funds.

Led by evidence leader advocate Nazreen Bawa, during his testimony before the parliamentary Section 194 inquiry committee, established by the National Assembly last March into the fitness of Mkhwebane to hold office, former executive manager for provincial investigations and integration Lufuno Ndou said he understood the remarks to constitute “a desire but not an instruction”.

Reflecting on what led to the phone call, Ndou said in September 2017 senior investigator advocate Erika Cilliers, who was leading the probe into the scandal, was taken off the assignment following a meeting attended by Mkhwebane and senior staff.

“At this meeting it was decided that the matter would be finalised by provincial investigations. My understanding was that the file would be handed over to my branch, which would be responsible for ensuring the report is finalised and signed off,” said Ndou.

ALSO READ: Mpofu ‘should know better’, says legal expert on his argument during Mkhwebane’s impeachment hearing

After the meeting, Ndou received “a short phone call” from Mkhwebane.

“She indicated to me that as far as she was concerned, advocate Cilliers was doing the bidding of the Democratic Alliance (DA) in this matter and that she was working for the DA. She also indicated that she would personally be happy if there would be no adverse findings.”

Bawa: “What did you think of comments made to you?”

Ndou: “They were surprising because what the public protector is enjoined to do, in terms of the law and the constitution, is to be impartial and independent. If you say you would be happy if there are no adverse findings, you are actually saying that you would be happy if we disregard whatever the evidence says in a specific file.

Bawa: “Did you understand this to be an instruction?”

Ndou: “I understood it to be a desire more than an instruction.”

Despite the “Gupta e-mails” being exposed by the media, including the Mail & Guardian, Ndou said the report only carried “a one-liner on the Guptas”.

“The report only said ‘we have noted the Gupta e-mails but that did not form part of the scope of the investigation’.

“I went against what was enunciated in the Mail & Guardian case. I also cautioned that – as an institution – we should have had very good reasons why this avenue was not explored.

“In the Mail & Guardian case, the court took Mkhwebane to task for not following where the evidence led. It said if she did not follow evidence the investigation was not complete.”