Cape Town - The Section 194 Committee dismissed an objection to the testimony by former security manager in the Office of the Public Protector, Baldwin Neshunzhi, in the inquiry of fitness of incumbent Busisiwe Mkhwebane to hold office.
Mkwebane’s legal counsel, Advocate Dali Mpofu, objected at the start of the hearing to the testimony of Neshunzhi, saying his testimony and some of the so-called “disgruntled employees” wasn’t relevant to the motion.
“We have a problem, of course, in the sense that in our view, the committee should be busying (itself) with those matters that would have gone through eyes of the needle, the Independent Panel.
“The evidence that is about to be presented is completely irrelevant,” Mpofu said.
He also said the committee shouldn’t be turned into some complaints office for people who might have gripes about the Office of the Public Protector.
“That is not the business of the committee; even portfolio committee of justice to which Public Protector normally accounts to. We have had a fair number of these so-called disgruntled employees.”
Mpofu argued the core of the complaints around the impeachment charge revolved around charges of misconduct, or incompetence, on confirmation of adverse comments made in four judgments.
“This witness, in particular, has not even have been approximately to deal with issues raised in the motion and would like to be told what would be the relevance of hearing someone who was transferred from one department to another,” he added.
Mpofu also said the issue of relevance was related to speeding up if the process was to be finalised, and deprived Mkhwebane of the ability to continue her work and serving the public.
“If it is true this process cost R1m a day, the public representatives should be reasonable enough,” he said.
Evidence leader Nazreen Bawa said where it was put in committee that was not relevant to the grounds; the committee must disregard that evidence.
“There are three aspects of this witness (which) bears relevance on six matters,” Bawa said.
She was referring to the fact that he was one of the employees whose laptop was taken for investigation, among other things.
Committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi noted that Mpofu referred to a “throwaway comment” by one of the members about R1m spent a day by the inquiry.
“I want to dispel that. There is not basis for that throwaway comment, which has been made about R1m we spend here every day. We would have said (that) at the beginning of process when we determined our terms of reference,” he said.
“This is a priceless process. This is about us enhancing democracy. This is a constitutional process of the National Assembly that we’ve got to do this pioneering work and the focus is to do its properly both in terms of process and outcome.”
Dyantyi said no one was to throw a figure by way of distracting the committee.
“We are not to going bar or stop any evidence being placed here. In our deliberations and conclusions, we can disregard anything seen as irrelevant,” he said.
However, Mpofu, who indicated that they would make a written submission or letter, said the default position of the committee should be to prevent irrelevant positions.
“We have to try to prevent irrelevant evidence, but we can’t allow anything. I want to place that on record,” he said.
Dyantyi ruled that he was making provisional ruling that the testimony by Neshunzhi was relevant and that the hearing would proceed.
He also said the committee would consider providing the cost for the hearing at their in-house meeting, but GOOD MP Brett Herron said it would help if the legal teams on the evidence that needed to be led.
Cape Times