Section 194 inquiry chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi has dismissed an application by Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane to recuse himself from the impeachment proceedings.
Mkhwebane lodged the application earlier this month setting out seven grounds for Dyantyi’s recusal.
The grounds included alleged bribery, corruption and extortion; pending investigation by the parliamentary ethics committee; pending police investigation; disparaging media statements and interviews, the inquiry proceeding without Mkhwebane’s legal representation; the role of late ANC MP Tina Joemat-Pettersson, and the role of ANC chief whip Pemmy Majodina.
The application was a sequel to the bribery and extortion allegations made by Joemat-Pettersson in cahoots with Dyantyi and Majodina against Mkhwebane’s husband, David Skosana.
In his written response, Dyantyi said he had taken the decision not to recuse himself as the chairperson or as a member of the committee after careful consideration.
“I do so on the basis that I categorically and vehemently deny that I have ever, in connection with the s194 process or the enquiry: bribed, sought to bribe or otherwise solicit a bribe through Ms Joemat-Pettersson or any third party from the PP or any other person,” he said in his response made public on Monday
Dyantyi also denied that he sought to extort anything from any person or subjected any person to pressure in return for a patrimonial or non-patrimonial advantage, or for any other reason whatsoever.
He also said he had not received any personal or financial benefit, or sought to receive such benefit, or that he had any personal or financial interest in the outcome of the inquiry.
Dyantyi denied he acted in any manner that was unfair to Mkhwebane.
“I am of the view that the evidence tendered does not support that there is any prima facie proof of the allegations in respect of myself, but rather raises further questions.
“I have maintained an open mind throughout the enquiry and reached no predetermined conclusions in the assessment of the charges in the motion.”
Dyantyi added that he had actively engaged with the evidence and would continue to apply his mind in a fair, unbiased and rational manner when concluding on findings and making recommendations to the National Assembly.
“I am acutely aware of my duty to ensure that the process is reasonable and procedurally fair. I have always acted in good faith to ensure that the requirement of fairness is balanced against the committee’s constitutional duty to perform its work diligently, without delay and within a reasonable time frame,” he said.
Dyantyi noted that the allegation of the absence of legal representation had been fully aired in the correspondence, had served on several occasions before the committee, and that written reasons had been provided in full for the decision to proceed where necessary.
“While I have endeavoured to deal with every averment, my failure to do so must not be construed as an acceptance thereof, and I reserve the right to deal with it at a later stage or in another forum if necessary.
“This is especially so as the application, like the previous one, is sometimes vague, contains several unsubstantiated and generalised statements; which include hearsay and personal views on political issues,” Dyantyi said.
Mkhwebane has previously threatened to go to court should Dyantyi not to recuse himself when she made her fresh bid for his removal from the inquiry.
Cape Times