Johnathan Paoli
Busisiwe Mkhwebane is set to report back to work as Public Protector on Tuesday after her suspension term has lapsed with the completion of the Section 94 Inquiry.
In a letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa, Mkhwebane informed the suspending authorities that she would be returning to her office on 5 September until the expiry of her term on 14 October of this year, subject to any lawful removal in terms of section 194 of the Constitution.
“In any event and as you may be aware l hold the firm view that the clearly rushed effort to remove me from office in spite of the fact that I will be left with less than 20 working days before the expiry of my term on 13 October 2023 is clearly driven by illegal, improper and motives of a political and personal nature other than any legitimate desire for accountability,” Mkhwebane wrote.
This follows on her address to the media last week Wednesday on her intention to challenge parliament’s section 194 report which recommended her dismissal.
The report recommending the removal of Mkhwebane has the majority support from members representing the ANC, DA, African Christian Democratic Party, Freedom Front Plus and the IFP.
Of the 35 members of the Section 194 Committee, 19 are from the ANC and four from the DA, one from the Freedom Front Plus, one from the IFP and one from the ACDP, forming what Mkhwebane called “an unassailable prepacked voting majority bloc of 26 which has voted together on every issue.”
Mkhwebane has raised grave objections to the rationality and fairness of the section 194 process, namely the committee’s denial of her right to legal representation as well as the decision by the Chairperson to recuse himself despite a conflict of interest.
The DA’s concern is that the public protector should not be allowed to receive a ‘golden handshake’ and carry out her term awaiting impeachment.
However, the danger of the successful removal of the head of a chapter 9 institution, despite the flaws and controversy surrounding the process, might set a precedent for further inappropriate interference.
INSIDE POLITICS
