Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane speaks to Advocate Dali Mpofu over a tea break during the parliamentary inquiry into her fitness to hold office in Parliament on 25 August 2022. Picture: Gallo Images / Daily Maverick /Leila Dougan
The parliamentary inquiry into suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane descended into chaos on Thursday, leaving a witness unable to testify.
The Section 194 Inquiry into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office was expected to hear evidence from Bianca Mvuyana, an investigator at the Public Protector’s office.
Mvuyana had been scheduled to give evidence on Monday, but could not do so after the Public Protector’s legal team was not available due to non-payment.
As the inquiry resumed on Thursday, advocate Dali Mpofu – representing Mkhwebane – indicated that he wants to raise concerns regarding a letter written by the Section 194 committee chairperson’s Qubudile Dyantyi before Mvuyana could testify,
Mpofu said the letter sent to Mkhwebane on Wednesday was a “serious stumbling block to us proceeding”.
ALSO READ: Mkhwebane inquiry swallowing up Public Protector’s limited budget, Parliament told
“We have a letter from you here which is disrespectful, untruthful and contains serious insults to the public protector and her legal team. We cannot proceed before that matter is dealt with and ask you to withdraw that letter.
“That’s an issue we want to put on the table. You may or may not decide to withdraw, but at least allow us to raise that point. You wrote that letter unprovoked,” he said.
However, Dyantyi said Mkhwebane and her legal team’s concerns should be raised in writing.
“I’m still waiting for a written response to that letter,” he said, adding that “today’s business of this committee is to interact with the witness”.
Following a short break, Mkhwebane also expressed her dissatisfaction over Dyantyi’s letter to the committee, saying it was “distorted and insulting”.
“It’s very concerning that you have signed such a letter chairperson. I wonder if you had gone through it and understood what it means because the way the letter is captured is very insulting,” she said.
The suspended public protector said she appreciated Dyantyi’s intervention on the issue of the legal fees, but insisted that there were “a lot of false statements” in the letter.
“Unfortunately, we cannot just shelve it. I’m very concerned because it seems as if you are taking what the [Public Protector’s office is] saying more than I am telling you what transpired.
RELATED: Mkhwebane not being evicted from state home but must pay for it herself – Public Protector’s office
“You even defend them about why I said they should approach National Treasury with your assistance to request additional funding. You even go further to include issues of me wasting a lot of money,” Mkhwebane continued.
On Tuesday, the Public Protector’s office hit back at Mkhwebane, saying her legal team charged more than the chapter 9 institution generally pays for legal services.
The office – which pays for Mkhwebane’s travel costs, accommodation and security – pointed out that the suspended public protector’s legal bills for her impeachment inquiry and related court matters was more than the initial amount given.
The institution also said Mkhwebane’s right to having lawyers at the inquiry did not mean the office was liable to pay the legal fees.
Mkhwebane, meanwhile, told the committee said she wanted to make sure that its member knew that the matter has been resolved.
“The [Public Protector’s office] has paid 100% of the invoices per the agreed arrangement. We would want to continue, but let everyone know the truth that the [Public Protector’s office] were dilly-dallying. I think there should be fairness, chairperson. We can’t have lies being perpetuated.”
Dyantyi then cut Mkhwebane short before asking Mpofu to proceed with questioning the witness.
READ MORE: ‘Playing for time’ – Mkhwebane trying to hold on until term of office expires
“You are saying we are not here to deal with letters, but we also not here to be insulted,” Mpofu responded, accusing Dyantyi of derailing the process and “bully-boy tactics”.
The advocate argued that Dyantyi’s letter had “blue lies”.
“There are about five such lies contained in the letter,” he told the committee.
But the chairperson reaffirmed his decision to allow Mkhwebane and her legal team to proceed.
“I’m not going to walk back on that,” he said, much to the dismay of Mpofu who argued that “stubbornness is not going to resolve this!”
Democratic Alliance (DA) MP Kevin Mileham proposed that the issue of the letters be postponed until Monday.
Another DA MP, Mimmy Gondwe, shared the same sentiments.
“We can’t deal with the matter right now if we are not aware of what the point of contention is with the letter,” Gondwe said.
While Mpofu indicated that the legal team will indeed respond in writing, he bemoaned the committee’s unwillingness to let him address the letter.
“People’s professional integrities have been attacked. To expect us to continue under those circumstances is too much.”
The committee is set to reconvene on Monday to deal with some of the issues raised by Mpofu.
NOW READ: Top five moments from Mkhwebane’s impeachment hearings
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
