Mkhwebane impeachment: Section 194 inquiry chair ‘avoided laying complaint against Mpofu after threats’

Section 194 Committee chairperson, Qubudile Dyantyi has denied abusing Advocate Dali Mpofu during a heated exchange last month.

The impeachment proceedings resumed on Monday, with Dyantyi rejecting Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s request to recuse himself.

Mpofu applied for Dyantyi’s recusal last month, accusing the committee’s chairperson of showing “inherent bias” towards him and his client.

‘Baseless and untrue’

The chairperson also indicated that Mpofu had no basis for accusing him of abusing him during the heated meeting on 13 September.

He dismissed Mkhwebane’s suggestion in the recusal application that he stated in a media interview, that the Legal Practice Council (LPC) should investigate Mpofu’s utterances, saying this was “incorrect”.

“The Public Protector alleges that I presented false facts during two interviews. These were not identified. As such, I am unable to deal with such allegations. For the avoidance of any doubt, I did not present any false facts… the claim is both baseless and untrue,” the chair told the committee.

Dyantyi continued to say: “I should note that Advocate Mpofu’s utterances are not mere allegations, but were viewed on a live broadcast by much of the country and confirmed by him during the proceedings.

ALSO READ: Here’s a recap of Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s impeachment proceedings so far

“His intention during the hearing was something that he expressly said, by first confirming it to be a threat, and thereafter clarifying that it was a promise. I did not replicate the stance of any particular political party, nor did I adopt an unduly hostile position.”

He further denied that he requested that Mpofu be removed the proceedings that day, instead he had asked that the advocate be muted.

“At no stage did I state that the Public Protector’s legal team be removed or that the Public Protector be stripped of a her right to legal representation. For the avoidance of any doubt, I have personally not laid any complaint – not taken any steps – to investigate Advocate Mpofu,” Dyantyi said.

“All that I indicated in the interview was that he is regulated by a professional body and if they feel he has to account they must call upon him to do so. I did not show or possess any lack of impartially or negative attitude,” he added.

‘It’s a promise’

At the time, Mpofu had asked Dyantyi for a postponement to work on the litigation following a court ruling, which overturned President Cyril Ramaphosa’s suspension of Mkhwebane.

Furthermore, the advocate said Mkhwebane was sick and at her doctor and could not attend the impeachment proceedings that day.

ALSO READ: Inquiry meant to persecute, harass and embarrass me, says Mkhwebane

Mpofu lost his cool when his request was denied, in which the advocate said: “The only reason I’m tolerating what you’re doing to me is for the interest of the client, otherwise you’re not entitled to abuse me like you’re abusing me.

“I’m senior to you in many ways, not just in age, but in many ways. You know it. So, you have no right to abuse me. But fine, you have the power now, you can exercise it, but you’ll pay one day, ja.”

Dyantyi then asked: “Are you threatening me?”

“Yeah, actually it’s not a threat. As I said, it’s a promise,” Mpofu responded.

Probe

Following the exchange, several MPs asked that Mpofu be investigated for his utterances in terms of the Powers and Privileges Act.

The Act states that no MP may be threatened while conducting their duties and this could carry a prison sentence of up to three years.

NOW READ: Inquiry meant to persecute, harass and embarrass me, says Mkhwebane