PHUTI MOSOMANE
In a startling revelation, Suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane, accused “the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary as well as the ANC/DA alliance” of being responsible for the death of the late ANC MP Tina Joemat-Pettersson.
Mkhwebane said in a media briefing on Tuesday Joemat-Pettersson would still be alive if all the state entities she mentioned “had complied with their constitutional obligations. In a way all these institutions killed Ms Joemat-Pettersson,” she charged.
However, shortly after Mkhwebane’s media briefing, Parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said both the National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula and Parliament “will not engage in public mudslinging with anyone, particularly when it involves ongoing investigations by various institutions, including Parliament.”
Mothapo said engaging in such would be fruitless, counterproductive, and undermine the truth-seeking efforts of these institutions as well as showing lack of sensitivity and respect to the bereaved family still coming to terms with the passing of Tina Joemat-Pettersson.
A few days before Joemat-Pettersson’s death allegations surfaced in newspapers and on social media of leaked whatsapp messages purported to be from a Member of Parliament’s Section 194 Inquiry Committee into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office – trying to solicit a bribe from Mkhwebane’s husband David Skosana.
It is for that reason Mkhwebane singled out the role of the Legislature in the death of Joemat-Pettersson as “probably much more direct than that of the Executive and the Judiciary, although they all played a direct or indirect role.”
In supporting her allegations Mkhwebane said on 16 March 2023, Joemat-Pettersson attended the enquiry physically, for the first and only time.
“She asked one of the parliamentary officials who attends the enquiry regularly, to give her phone to my husband and requested him to punch his number. This can be verified with the parliamentary official in question. We are still trying to establish his name,” she said.
Upon acquiring the numbers, Mkhwebane said Joemat-Pettersson invited her husband to two separate physical meetings both held at the Ocean Basket restaurant at OR Tambo International Airport.
“At these meetings she solicited a bribe of approximately R600 000 for herself, Mr Richard Dyantyi who is the Chairperson of the Enquiry and Ms Pemmy Majodina who is the Chief Whip of the ruling ANC. My husband pretended to play along and even “negotiated” the price to be set at R150 000 instead of R200 000 each.”
She said her husband intended to trap the culprits and he proceeded to record the two meetings on his phone.
“He also insisted that Mrs Joemat-Pettersson should arrange a meeting at which at least one of the other two would attend. This was agreed, provided the “conditions” or the payment of the money were met. Unfortunately the “deal” went sour before the “conditions” were met,” she said.
However, Joemat-Pettersson was unhappy with Skosana’s decision to go public because, in her view, the evidence will be “bad for everyone” and that will destroy her.
“I am very sorry that you want to destroy me because of your anger,” Joemat-Pettersson is alleged to have said.
During the press briefing, audio recordings were played of the two airport meetings as well as more WhatsApp messages exchanged between Skosana and Joemat-Pettersson for the period between the middle and the end of March 2023.
Mkhwebane said the evidence has been shared with the police and a Hawks investigation is currently underway.
“Needless to say, had the legislature, the Speaker and members of the Committee discharged their duties in line with their oaths of office, it is most likely that Mrs Joemat-Pettersson would be very much alive today.”
“In my view if the Speaker had agreed to the confidential meeting I proposed, the late former Minister may have been alive,” she added.
According to Mkhwebane Joemat-Pettersson alleged in March that there was a plan and an instruction to shorten the proceedings towards “the desired outcome” by no longer affording Mkhwebane an opportunity to complete her oral evidence but switching to written statements or affidavit and shortening the period for closing arguments.
“Last Friday, Dyantyi, reading from an externally prepared document, announced exactly this,” Mkhwebane said at the press briefing adding that the plan was clearly generated outside of the Section 194 Committee.
In one recording Joemat-Pettersson could be heard saying: “That’s what they told him.”
Secondly, Joemat-Pettersson had indicated that one of the reasons Dyantyi was required to be paid a bribe was that he might be “kicked out” while he wanted to be the ANC Chair of the Western Cape province.
“Two days ago the Sunday Times named 3 contenders for that position. Top of the list was Mr Richard Dyantyi. This was exactly in line with what she (Joemat-Pettersson) had said about the current political ambitions of Mr Dyantyi, whom she described as a close ally and “my man”,” Mkhwebane said.
Mkhwabane said she wants Dyantyi removed from chairing the section 194 Committee, pending the outcomes of the criminal and parliamentary investigations or that “the section 194 Committee be terminated with immediate effect as it now irretrievably and incurably tainted, poisoned and clearly driven by a predetermined outcome.”
“The inquiry is therefore a deliberate waste of taxpayers money which can never withstand any proper legal scrutiny,” she said.
At the jam-packed briefing Mkhwebane also went into great detail on what she perceived the role of the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary as well as the ANC/DA alliance was in Joemat-Pettersson’s mysterious death a week ago.
Joemat-Pettersson’s untimely death is still a matter of police investigation.
Mkhwebane also published what she said were recordings from the conversation between Joemat-Pettersson and Skosana to prove that she was trying to solicit a bribe from Skosana.
Mkhwebane detailed the accusations under each category and sought to explain how these entities ‘killed’ Joemat-Pettersson.
On her suspension by President Cyril Ramaphosa, Mkhwebane said more than a year ago on 9 June 2022, Ramaphosa “abused the powers” given to him in terms of the Constitution to suspend her.
This decision was later declared invalid and unlawful by a court, and was a subject of appeals by Ramaphosa and the Democratic Alliance, she said.
“Without the unlawful suspension and disingenuous “appeal”, I would have returned to my office on 10 September 2022 and Ms Joemat-Pettersson would probably be alive today. It is noteworthy that the court found that the real reason for my suspension was to avenge the 31 questions I asked in respect of alleged criminality involved in the Phalaphala scandal,” she said.
Mkhwebane also launched an attack on the role of the judiciary.
She said in addition to refusing the section 18 relief granted by the High Court, the alleged “urgent appeal” was set down for hearing in the Constitutional Court on an expedited basis at the behest of Ramaphosa and the DA.
Although it was heard urgently on 24 November 2022, Mkhwebane said to date the Constitutional Court has failed to issue a judgment.
The 6 months period within which even non-urgent judgments have to be handed down expired on 24 May 2023, she claimed.
On 25 May 2023, Mkhwebane lodged a complaint of gross misconduct with the Judicial Service Commission (“JSC”) against the 9 Judges who sat in the matter.
She said a separate complaint against Chief Justice Zondo and Justice Kollapen will still be lodged in respect of their alleged role in “the scandal involving the leakage of a decision of the Constitutional Court to Ismail Abramjee and the subsequent conduct in sweeping under the carpet what should rank as the biggest scandal affecting our judiciary.”
“It is fair to say that if the Chief Justice and the Constitutional Court Justices had complied with their constitutional obligations, Ms Tina Joemat-Pettersson may have been alive today. Even if the judgment can be issued now, it is too late for her. It will also be irrelevant to me. So the Justices may as well send the judgment to universities because its relevance and usefulness is now only academic.”
INSIDE POLITICS
