Cape Town - The Section 194 committee on Tuesday dismissed an application by Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane to have two of its evidence leaders removed from the inquiry into her fitness to hold office.
Mkhwebane’s legal counsel, advocate Dali Mpofu SC, brought the application on Monday against advocates Nazreen Bawa and Ncumisa Mayosi.
Although the evidence leaders made written submissions rebutting the accusations against them and Mkhwebane submitting an answering affidavit, they were not given an opportunity to make oral presentations.
Only parliamentary legal adviser Fatima Ebrahim was allowed to reflect on Mkhwebane’s application.
There was initially an issue with the late submission of an affidavit by Mkhwebane’s legal team.
“I consider the fact that there has been no submission; that is a train smash. We will proceed with the deliberations,” committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi said.
GOOD Party MP Brett Herron: “I don’t think a case has been made that evidence leaders need to be removed. I ask that we manage actively what evidence is presented and the manner in which it is presented,” Herron said.
ACDP MP Marie Sukers said the committee had ensured its processes and procedures were fair to Mkhwebane.
“It is not the evidence of leaders that are before us. It is the public and the committee that need to hear the public protector answer to this committee,” Sukers said.
DA MP Mimmy Gondwe said the application was an attempt to stall the committee’s work.
“If we had a problem with evidence leaders, if we noted misconduct, we should have stopped them and requested that they be removed and replaced,” Gondwe said.
ANC MP Bhekizwe Nkosi said it would not be unreasonable to continue with the proceedings.
“We must reassert the fact that the Section 194 committee is the oversight committee of Parliament... We adhered to due process and procedural fairness,” Nkosi said.
EFF MP Omphile Maotwe said her party supported the removal of the evidence leaders. She then took a swipe at Ebrahim and Bawa.
Dyantyi was not spared as Maotwe charged that he too was biased and undermined basic tenets of fairness.
“You can all collude to keep her as evidence leader but you will have to deal with the outcome of the discredited process,” she said.
UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said there was a problem with the evidence leaders as some witnesses claimed things were added in their affidavits without their knowledge.
He advised Mkhwebane’s legal team to complain to National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula about the matter and also consider approaching the court.
Freedom Front Plus chief whip Corné Mulder said there was an artificial outcry created by the application.
“This is the most fair process that has been in Parliament since 1994,” Mulder said, before calling for dismissal of the application.
In his ruling, Dyantyi said 10 MPs out of 12 were unanimous that Mkhwebane's application did not meet the threshold and that it bore no relevance to the work of the committee.
“There is no way we can accede and therefore this application must be dismissed and rejected,” he said.
Dyantyi also said they have to focus on the work that needed to be done.
“We are looking to hear from the public protector to give us reasons why she must be exonerated and we can’t delay that any longer,” he said.
Dyantyi indicated that when the hearings resumed in January after adjournment on December 5, they would want Mkhwebane to be the first witness.
When Mpofu was asked to make leading arguments before witness Freddie Nyathela was sworn in, he noted that Mkhwebane was abused in the inquiry.
He raised concern that his team and the evidence leaders had no opportunity to clarify matters to MPs who were not legally trained.
Mpofu also said they were more than ready and keen to see the finality of the inquiry and Mkhwebane giving her side of the story.
“That must not be mistaken that we are to subject ourselves to a kangaroo court and not raise objections as we are entitled to constitutionally.”
Mpofu gave a line-up of their witnesses and indicated that former DA chief whip Natasha Mazzone, the mover of the impeachment motion against Mkhwebane, has refused to voluntarily appear before the inquiry at their request.
“We are now in the land of subpoenas,” Mpofu said.
The inquiry resumes with the testimony of Nyathela on Wednesday.
Cape Times