EMBATTLED Western Cape ANC chairperson Marius Fransman has lashed out at the party after the outcome of an internal probe into his alleged sexual harassment was leaked to a weekend newspaper.
Yesterday, City Press reported the ANC’s integrity committee found Fransman’s “actions had brought the ANC into disrepute and had tarnished its image” after a Stellenbosch woman, Louisa Wynand, had laid a criminal complaint of sexual harassment against him.
In a media statement, Fransman demanded the committee’s case against him, and its findings, be made public.
“Since February I didn’t receive any substantial communication from the integrity committee, especially not its findings, as they have promised they would deliver on completion.
“I am obliged, therefore, to now call upon the integrity committee to provide me forthwith with its full findings in service of administrative justice,” said Fransman.
Despite the director of public prosecutions in North West stating it would not prosecute Fransman over the complaint, Northern Cape police last month said Fransman was still the subject of an investigation.
Wynand’s complaint stemmed from events leading to the ANC’s annual birthday celebrations in January, which hosted in Rustenburg.
She complained to police that she had been sexually harassed by Fransman while travelling to Kimberley, while staying at a hotel there and then again at Sun City.
After Wynand had testified before the committee, one of its members had offered her a bursary, which was reported by the Daily Maverick.
According to City Press, the ANC’s integrity committee recommended that Fransman relinquish all positions he holds in the party and not be eligible to be nominated for any positions. This could be reviewed in two years.
In a long Facebook post, Fransman charged that the ANC’s “organisational protocols had been disrespected and abused at all costs to get rid of me”.
He said his constitutional rights had been violated through a decision by the ANC which asked him to “step aside” amid the allegations against him, despite the fact that he had been duly elected and without following the party’s constitution. He dubbed it a coup d’état.
And while the drama has played itself out in the media, Fransman said there had been no communication to him from the ANC about his case before the integrity committee.
“Last few months I was asked to allow the organisation to deal with my issue, I every month read a new matter in the media, and I am equally surprised every time, because the members of the organisation and people generally obviously are under the impression that these matters are being dealt with between me and HQ (Luthuli House), and when they read it in media that is suppose to mean I was informed of issues and are participating in some internal process (sic),” wrote Fransman.
ANC spokesperson Khusela Sangoni said the party would not publicly discuss any reports of the integrity committee with the media.
“Once a report is finalised it is presented to the officials (ANC top six), and then to the national executive committee for noting. If necessary, a public statement would then be issued after that,” said Sangoni.
But Fransman demanded that those dealing with his case in the ANC “be principled and respectful of organisational and constitutional process”.
“Seemingly this is not the case, and I have just read in the papers that I must stand aside for 2 years,” wrote Fransman.
He claimed the leaking of the report was part of an internal political smear emanating from the ANC’s provincial conference last year in which the “Unity in Diversity” faction failed to dislodge him from his position as provincial chairperson.
“If that’s the only way to get rid of me when they couldn’t get rid of me at the provincial conference, then it is but a bad attempt.
“I’m a seasoned cadre, and since February I hold the view that I understand that there’s some senior elements that is part of machinery to ensure I never return as chairperson. This I accept.
"In fact I even wrote a letter in February suggesting we can have a nice discussion about that (sic),” wrote Fransman.
He claimed the study bursary offered to Wynand by a member of the integrity committee after she had testified was a reward for implicating him, and not an “error of judgment”.