Johannesburg - The DA has National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) deputy advocate Nomgcobo Jiba firmly in its sights as it launched court proceedings on Sunday to set aside President Jacob Zuma’s decision not to suspend her – and to have her suspended pending an inquiry into her fitness for office.
Turning to the courts came after NPA boss Shaun Abrahams last month agreed with a subordinate’s decision to drop charges of perjury and fraud against Jiba.
Those charges arose, at least in part, from judgments that threw out the suspension of and criminal racketeering charges against KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Johan Booysen.
The charges against Jiba were instituted by former NPA head Mxolisi Nxasana, who had also asked the president to suspend her following other courts’ criticism of her conduct, but who instead left well before the end of his term in August 2023.
Although the fraud and perjury charges against Jiba were dropped in mid-August, she still faces a professional inquiry by the General Council of the Bar (GCB).
If the bar council decides on her removal from the roll of advocates, it would leave Jiba unqualified for the NPA.
Meanwhile, Booysen was again suspended last week, shortly after Major-General Mthandazo Ntlemeza was announced as the new national Hawks boss.
In its court papers, the DA wants the Western Cape High Court to set aside Zuma’s decision on or about September 1 not to suspend Jiba, arguing that it was irrational and unlawful not to suspend her given various court statements on her conduct, and to have an inquiry into Jiba’s fitness to hold office.
“Given the repeated findings of serious misconduct by the courts, and the application by the bar council, the president’s decision is irrational and unlawful. It is inconsistent with the constitutionally entrenched independence of the NPA and the courts for advocate Jiba to remain in her position.
“The only explanation for the president’s conduct is that he is motivated by an ulterior purpose, and had effectively abandoned his own power to act to the GCB and the courts,” says DA MP James Selfe in the founding affidavit.
“If after conducting that inquiry (into fitness for office), the president concludes the findings against her are misguided, or they do not justify her removal from office, he may act accordingly. What he cannot do is refuse to ask whether she should be removed or not. That is patently irrational.”
The court action cites Zuma, Justice Minister Michael Masutha, Abrahams, Jiba and, because of a possible interest in the matter, the General Council of the Bar, although its process is regarded as separate. The DA argues the court action arises out of its constitutional duty, and is based not only on its interest, but also that of the public.
The court documents argue the president is empowered by the Constitution and NPA Act to suspend, and following an inquiry, to remove a deputy national director of prosecutions, which Jiba is, for misconduct, ill-health, incapacity or because the person is no longer a fit and proper person. The decision to remove must be forwarded to Parliament, which must uphold or reject the presidential decision within 30 days.
The Star