Johannesburg - President Jacob Zuma is taking on Public Protector Thuli Madonsela over her Nkandla findings, saying he disagrees with the insistence that her reports are not subject to reviewing or “second guessing” by cabinet members.
Zuma added that Madonsela’s work was quite distinct from that of a judge.
In his letter to the public protector released by the Presidency on Thursday, Zuma further states that Madonsela should await the outcome of the parliamentary process, in the form of the Nkandla ad hoc committee.
Zuma was responding to Madonsela following her leaked letter to him regarding her “Secure in Comfort” report on the Nkandla upgrades.
Zuma’s letter was also copied to Speaker Baleka Mbete. Zuma on Thursday also submitted the final report of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) into the security upgrades at his Nkandla residence to Parliament.
“I must respectfully disagree with your assertion that reports of the public protector are by law not subject to any review or second guessing by a minister and/or cabinet and the findings made and remedial action taken by the public protector can only be judicially reviewed and set aside by a court of law,” said Zuma.
He said the Office of the Public Protector played an invaluable role in the country’s constitutional democracy by bringing about public accountability.
“The role of the public protector is akin to that of an ombud and quite distinct from that of a judge. Similarly, reports emanating from a public protector process are not judgments to be followed under pain of a contempt order, but rather, useful tools in assisting democracy in a co-operative manner, sometimes rather forcefully,” said Zuma.
In her letter to Zuma towards the end of last month, Madonsela said the president was second guessing her recommendations following her investigation into the security upgrades at his Nkandla homestead.
Madonsela recommended that Zuma repay some of the money spent on upgrades not related to security, such as the swimming pool, cattle kraal, amphitheatre and visitors’ centre.
In a 20-page reply to Madonsela’s report, Zuma indicated that Police Minister Nathi Nhleko would start a process to determine whether he should repay any of the money and how much.
Zuma said that if his responsibility was only to review Madonsela’s decision or to “rubber-stamp” it, he would be failing in discharging his own constitutional responsibilities and “acting in an irrational manner and flouting the principle of legality”.
He said while the public protector’s reports played an important role, they were, for a variety of reasons, “impregnable from review”.
Zuma said Madonsela must compile her report and allow “appropriate” institutions to consider and react to it.
“I am awaiting the outcome of the parliamentary process and venture to suggest that you likewise should allow this important institution of our democracy an opportunity to do its work,” said Zuma.
Presidency spokesman Mac Maharaj said on Thursday that Zuma had submitted the final report of the SIU into the security upgrades, after several delays.
In December, Zuma had directed the SIU to investigate certain allegations made in respect of the security upgrades.
In July, the ANC said Zuma had received a provisional SIU report and would provide Mbete with a final and comprehensive response within 30 days. He missed the 30-day deadline.
Political Bureau