Uproar at Mkhwebane enquiry as amid clash over funds for her legal representation

On Monday, Dyantyi repeated to committee members that it was not the committee’s job to deal with issues of how Mkhwebane’s legal representation was financed. Picture: Phando Jikelo/African News Agency

On Monday, Dyantyi repeated to committee members that it was not the committee’s job to deal with issues of how Mkhwebane’s legal representation was financed. Picture: Phando Jikelo/African News Agency

Published Apr 4, 2023

Share

Cape Town - There was an uproar at Parliament’s enquiry into suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office when divisions arose between committee members and chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi over whether it was fair to resume while Mkhwebane lacks legal representation.

On Friday, Mkhwebane’s legal team stopped representing her at the enquiry after the PPSA’s funding for Mkhwebane’s legal costs had dried up.

This followed the PPSA’s earlier notice that it had only budgeted for Mkhwebane’s lawyers until March 31.

On Monday, Dyantyi repeated to committee members that it was not the committee’s job to deal with issues of how Mkhwebane’s legal representation was financed.

He said negotiations by the “relevant role players”, which began at the weekend, were ongoing but he had no details to share.

Committee member Bantu Holomisa (UDM) proposed that the proceedings be postponed until a solution was found to Mkhwebane’s legal funding woes.

He was supported by EFF MP Omphile Maotwe, who said for the committee to continue without legal representation for Mkhwebane bordered on illegality.

GOOD Party MP Brett Herron said the proceedings would be a recipe for a legal challenge to whatever eventual outcome there was at the end of the process.

ATM party leader Vuyo Zungula said that if the Zondo Commission could find a way out of its financial problems, the enquiry could too.

Meanwhile, Mkhwebane said she was unable to proceed without her representation, and referred the committee to the Constitutional Court finding that said she was entitled to legal representation of her own choosing.

“What fairness is there If this matter proceeds? What would be fair would be for you to have all hands on deck to find the resources so that we can proceed in a proper manner.”

Mkhwebane said if funding could be found for the committee’s evidence leaders, it should be easy to dip into the fiscus to find funding for her legal team.

When later, Dyantyi gave evidence leader Nazreen Bawa, SC, a chance to explain her plan of action to tackle Mkhwebane’s evidence so far, it was the last straw for Mkhwebane, who asked to be excused.

She said while she was without legal representation it would be unethical for Bawa to address the committee on issues before the enquiry.