Advocate Dali Mpofu says suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s legal team will call witnesses to testify at the Section 194 Inquiry in the order that they want to.
Proceedings into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office resumed on Tuesday after Mpofu filed a removal application against advocates Nazreen Bawa and Ncumisa Majosi the day before.
The public protector’s application was brought on the grounds that the evidence leaders displayed misconduct, cross-examined witnesses, and helped witnesses with their affidavits.
ALSO READ: Mkhwebane inquiry: Evidence leader accused of perpetuating ‘racist stereotype’ of black professionals
Members of the committee deliberated on the matter during Tuesday’s proceedings, with the majority agreeing to reject Mkhwebane’s application.
Reacting to the outcome, Mpofu argued that the time given to them to provide a written response to the evidence leaders’ response to the application was not enough.
Mpofu and his team been given time until 8am on Tuesday to make their submissions, but promised to do so by 10:30.
However, the arguments were sent to the committee at 11:08 as MPs discussed Mkhwebane’s application.
‘Blatantly unfair’
Mpofu told the committee that his team “tried everything” to submit their response, before taking a dig at Bawa and Mayosi for their late submissions.
“The time was insufficient, inadequate and blatantly unfair because the whole thing was precipitated by the failure of someone to send us the document on Saturday, as we were promised by you chair.
“We heard that our document was 38 minutes late, but [when] a document was a day or two days late there’s no problem with that,” he said.
“It is really sad how the public protector is abused in this process.”
RELATED: Mkhwebane impeachment: Section 194 inquiry chair ‘avoided laying complaint against Mpofu after threats’
Mpofu said he found it “objectionable” that the committee made a decision without Mkhwebane’s lawyers being given a proper opportunity to respond to the evidence leaders’ submissions.
“It’s quite clear that everyone is just intent on rushing to the stage of the chopping of the head because now it looks like that the rules has even changed.
“It the first time that there’s an application where we have not had the opportunity to clarify certain things to members [of the committee], most of whom are not legally trained and may have wanted to understand the issues raised by both the evidence leaders and ourselves. But It looks like we are just talking to deaf ears,” the advocate said.
Watch the proceedings below:
He criticised parliamentary legal services advisor Fatima Ebrahim’s submissions to the committee, saying the legal opinion was “completely out of line”.
Mpofu cut short
Mpofu also expressed concern over the fact that he wasn’t allowed to finish his oral submissions on Monday.
Section 194 inquiry chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi cut Mpofu short after the advocate went over his allocated time of an hour on Monday.
Dyantyi had pointed out that Mpofu had been given an additional 15 minutes and was not going to get more time.
READ MORE: Inquiry meant to persecute, harass and embarrass me, says Mkhwebane
Mpofu again accused the committee of being a “kangaroo court”, insisting that they were appearing before the inquiry “under protest“.
“It has been quite an ordeal, to say the least,” he said.
Mpofu further told the committee that they would ask for a “secret ballot” as protection when members vote on whether to impeach the public protector or not.
Mpofu on Mkhwebane being first witness in January
The advocate also responded to Dyantyi’s remark that Mkhwebane must be the first witness when the committee reconvenes in January.
“Chairperson, I have news for you; we are going to call the witnesses in the sequence that we chose to call them as we are entitled to. What’s next? Are you going to tell us what questions to ask or what we must wear when we come here?” Mpofu asked.
Mkhwebane’s witnesses are expected to testify at the inquiry until 9 December.
The public protector wanted President Cyril Ramaphosa to testify in relation to some of the charges she faces, but the committee has already declined to subpoena him.
Recusal application
Meanwhile, the public protector is challenging Dyantyi and DA MP Kevin Mileham’s decision not to recuse themselves from the impeachment inquiry.
Mpofu previously indicated that they have filed a review application and the matter has been set down on the urgent roll of the Western Cape High Court for 13 and 14 December.
NOW READ: Mkhwebane impeachment: Public Protector to challenge recusal decision – Dali Mpofu
