PHUTI MOSOMANE
THE Committee for Section 194 Enquiry into suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office has resolved to refuse a request for the postponement of her testimony in Parliament.
This follows a written request by Mkhwebane’s legal team for a further extension in providing her statement to the Committee.
The Committee’s chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi previously agreed to extend the original deadline from 7 March to 9 March, and 14 March by allowing Mkhwebane to submit her statement in two parts.
Mkhwebane, however, requested an extension to 27 March 2023 instead of 15 March 2023 as per the programme.
Dyantyi said that the Committee had already granted a postponement for Mkhwebane’s affidavit but would allow additional time for preparation of the statement without moving the date for her appearance.
“The committee has taken into account that postponement due to the testimony of Prof Madonsela being finalized today. Our programme at this stage is to finalise the evidence on 30 March. We had already granted a two-day postponement, factoring in Prof Madonsela’s testimony. We are granting a further postponement until 14 March 2023 to supply the affidavit,” said Dyantyi.
“In terms of the Directives within which the committee operates, it does not specify that an affidavit must precede the testimony. Members are of the firm view that the process is not open-ended.”
“The committee had further regard to the letter it received from the PPSA regarding the financial difficulties it finds itself in. According to the letter, due to financial constraints, the PPSA can only pay legal fees for the PP in respect of the hearings until the end of the financial year, being 31 March.”
He said the committee is of the view that it cannot put the Office of the Public Protector under further strain where they could be incurring irregular expenditure.
“We will be the very people to question them on this,” added Dyantyi.
Regarding Mkhwebane’s request to call further witnesses, the Committee resolved that at this stage it will accept statements from the witnesses provided from her legal team and then make a decision on the relevance and necessity of calling for oral evidence.
Earlier in the day, the Committee heard that nothing in law renders the affidavit of the former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela, illegal or invalid as was purported by the PP’s legal team yesterday. Adv Ncumisa Mayosi, one of the evidence leaders, read out both the Justices of the Peace and Commissioner of Oaths Act and the Regulations governing it, to verify the sections that were quoted yesterday bringing to question the legality or validity of Madonsela’s affidavit.
Advocate Dali Mpofu, representing Mkhwebane, questioned the legality or validity of the affidavit by Madonsela that was provided to the committee on 28 February 2023.
He said in terms of the Justices of the Peace and Commissioner of Oaths Act and the Regulations, the legality of the “document” as he called it, was brought into question as not each page was ‘initialled’.
Madonsela referred the Committee to a Western Cape High Court judgement in which the court found that it is a practice and not a legal requirement for the validity of an affidavit.
She denied that she issued a provisional report in relation to the Vrede Dairy investigation, as was purported. The copy that was shown in the meeting bears her details at the end of the report, but no signature.
Dyantyi concluded that the hearings will resume next Wednesday, 15 March 2023, with the expected testimony of Advocate Mkhwebane.
The Committee was established by the National Assembly (NA) on 16 March 2021 to conduct a constitutional inquiry into the Public Protector’s fitness to hold office and is expected to provide the National Assembly with a report by the end of April 2023.
Last month, it emerged that the Office of the Public Protector had written to Mkhwebane, informing her that they can only pay her legal team until 31 March 2023.
This after acting Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka informed Parliament that the impeachment inquiry was already absorbing the office’s limited budget.
Gcaleka indicated that the total cost of the proceedings in Parlaiment could escalate to anything between R12 million to R15 million by the end of March.
INSIDE POLITICS
