Cape Town - Evidence leaders in the section 194 inquiry established to determine Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold public office once again came under fire from Advocate Dali Mpofu SC, who wants them removed from the committee, citing a lack of fairness.
Representing Mkhwebane, Mpofu lodged another appeal on Monday - this time not only gunning for Advocate Nazreen Bawa, but also her colleague Advocate Ncumisa Mayosi.
At the heart of Mkhwebane’s grievances against the two is the publishing of the incorrect legal fees of mostly black legal representatives by evidence leaders during the proceedings.
Mpofu said if the evidence leaders continued to maintain their positions at the hearing, it would be impossible for the standards set out in the rules and the Constitution to be upheld.
“The Public Protector herself is of the reasonable view and reasonable apprehension that if the evidence leaders remain in place, it is impossible to receive the promised fairness.
“One of ways to ensure the inquiry is procedurally fair is by granting the application for the removal and replacement of the evidence leaders,” Mpofu said.
He said the evidence leaders caused the names and fees of various black counsel and attorneys who do work for the Office of the Public Protector to be displayed during the inquiry, while knowing proceedings were aired on YouTube and television channels.
Mpofu said the evidence leaders failed to give prior warning and to affected advocates and attorneys and that they also failed to give context to the figures that were shared.
“In some instances the amounts flighted were not correct because the evidence leaders did not take time to at least consult advocates and attorneys concerned for clarity.”
He said the evidence leaders had admitted to the inaccurate figures.
“What other inaccuracies have been bandied about here where there were no people protesting about them to be corrected?” Mpofu asked.
He said the evidence leaders violated the inquiry’s directives by cross-examining a witness, Muntu Sithole, to the extent that he felt unprotected by inquiry’s chairperson, Qubudile Dyantyi.
Mpofu could not finish his oral presentation despite his protestations as Dyantyi determined that he had exceeded his allocated time.
Dyantyi also adjourned the proceedings because Mkhwebane’s legal team was not furnished with the responses of the evidence leaders.
“I want to suggest that it is important when we deliberate as members that you have everything (necessary) and there is nothing missing,” he said before blaming oversight by the secretariat for not sending the evidence leaders’ responses today and instructed Mkhwebane’s legal team to make their response in writing in the morning.
Mpofu complained about the unreasonable time given to them to submit their written response and also prepare for their first witness, who will testify in the afternoon.
“We will try to comply with it even if we think it is unreasonable,” he said.
His second request to be allowed to finish his oral submission on the application to remove and replace evidence leaders was refused.
“The issue again goes to what we have been at pains to say here from day one. There seems to be some zeal to go through the motion and get it over,” Mpofu said.
“We need to be given fair opportunity to present our case,” he added.
Earlier, Mpofu told the inquiry he had the feeling that the evidence leaders’ attitude towards Mkhwebane’s witnesses had changed after they had finished leading their witnesses.
“It goes to the issue we raised from day one about handicaps with the fact that the Public Protector is attending this process under the spell of an illegal, improper and probably criminal suspension.”
He detailed problems encountered in getting their first witness to be at the inquiry on Tuesday. He added they had made a request to be assisted with some witnesses who might not be willing to testify.
Mpofu indicated Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan, former DA chief Natasha Mazzone and former public protector Thuli Madonsela were some of the “crucial” witnesses they wanted to testify, but only the minister had responded, saying he would indicate his position this week.
He said in addition to getting President Cyril Ramaphosa to testify, Deputy Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka indicated her unwillingness to appear before the inquiry.
“Those are the five witnesses we need assistance with from the committee.”
Cape Times