Pretoria - Public Protector Thuli Madonsela said on Monday a “worrying” trend of defying her office and denying it funds has emerged since she penned her “Secure in Comfort” report on state expenditure on President Jacob Zuma’s private home.
“The bickering which has included withholding support for this office’s request for a much needed budget increase is undermining this constitutional institution’s optimal contribution to the strengthening of constitutional democracy through administrative scrutiny,” Madonsela told reporters in Pretoria.
“I am accordingly appealing to the National Assembly to collectively exercise leadership to ensure that engagement with this office is informed by and in line with Section 181 of the Constitution and Section 8 and 9 Public Protector Act. Since the bickering started, we are witnessing worrying defiant trends. The emerging attitudes, though few, are a worrying trend.”
Madonsela said she was addressing media on Monday because she had not been afforded the opportunity to address Parliament on her findings. Her reading notes were addressed to the Speaker of the National Assembly.
“Honourable Speaker of the National Assembly, Honourable Members of the National Assembly and the people of South Africa - I am deeply saddened by the fact that I have to use the media as a platform to address you. This is not my preferred mechanism to engage you but the only one I have, after the ad-hoc committee deliberating on the findings I made following an investigation into alleged unduly excessive upgrades at President Zuma’s private home decided not to invite me to address Parliament on this matter,” she said.
“I’m further convinced that this mechanism of engagement is neither the one envisaged by the architects of our constitutional democracy nor the mechanism used between legislators and public protector-like institutions across the globe. I took the decision to engage you and the nation to advise you on the constitutional provisions regarding the governance of the Public Protector as a constitutional institution.”
She said there had been several utterances which have led to “misinformation” about her findings in the “Secure in Comfort” report.
“Such utterances include whether or not I ever asked the minister of police to make any determination regarding the president’s payment of a reasonable portion of the cost of non-security upgrades to his private home, what is it exactly I considered to be non-security upgrades and the basis of my decision. In its 20 years of existence, this office has never received such vitriolic attacks from politicians as it has done following the release of the report Secure in Comfort,” said Madonsela.
“What is encouraging though is that not once has any of the attacks suggested that Secure in Comfort deviated from the approach taken by my team and I in the manner in which we investigated and presented findings and remedial action in respect of other reports issued under the Executive Members Ethics Act since I became Public Protector in 2009.”
Madonsela lamented what she called “unprecedented vitriolic attacks” on her office.
“We also should not underestimate the importance of peace and stability to development and the importance of good governance, include accountability integrity and responsiveness to peace and stability,” she said.
“It is also worth considering, as the NDP (National Development Plan) does, that this office and other integrity institutions have enormous potential to play a meaning role in curbing the loss of public funds that are dearly needed for the delivery of basic services particularly those promised by the Constitution.”
She said an independent Public Protector’s office was critical to a credible democracy.
“I appeal that we stop personalising matters and uphold the Constitution as we partner in helping the people of South Africa exert accountability in the exercise of public power and control over public resources. This is important if government is to play a central role in driving delivery on the constitutional promise of an inclusive South Africa,” said Madonsela.
She referred to former president Nelson Mandela’s handling of criticism.
“I have wondered what (former) president Mandela would have made of at this bizarre turn of events, considering that he once said the following ‘even the most benevolent of governments were made up of people with all the propensities of human feelings.
“The rule of law as we understand it consists in the set of conventions and arrangements that ensure that it is not left to the whims of individuals rulers to decide what is good for the populace. The administrative conduct of government and authorities are subject to scrutiny of independent organs… an essential part of that constitutional architecture is those state institutions supporting constitutional democracy - among those are the Public Protector, the Auditor General, the Human Rights Commission, the Constitutional Court and others.”
Madonsela said she was also unsure what Zuma was making of the attacks on her office.
In March last year, Madonsela found that Zuma had unduly benefited from security upgrades with a price tag of R246 million to his private home in Nkandla, and recommended he pay back a portion of the public funds used for the project.
ANA