Cape Town - The start of testimony of former public protector Thuli Madonsela in the inquiry into the fitness of her successor, Busisiwe Mkhwebane, to hold office was marred by delays on Wednesday.
Mkhwebane’s legal counsel, Advocate Dali Mpofu, asked to address the Section 194 Committee at the start of the inquiry, delaying Madonsela’s swearing in.
Mpofu wanted to address the committee after it rejected Mkhwebane’s request for the postponement of Madonsela’s testimony and also requested the committee to recall three witnesses that already gave evidence and subpoena those that were deemed irrelevant to the inquiry.
In Wednesday’s proceedings, Mkhwebane wanted another witness, Rodney Mataboge, to give his evidence, citing that they have had no time to prepare because they received Madonsela’s affidavit on February 24, as they were preparing to travel to Cape Town and prepare for another witness, Bianca Mvuyana, who gave her testimony last Monday and Tuesday.
Addressing the committee, Mpofu said they received committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi’s letter and had also watched the proceedings when their request was considered.
“We have been instructed to just respond to the letter and those proceedings. Both the letter and your proceedings were received with a lot of pain by our client,” he said.
“Watching what was being said about her in the YouTube broadcast, we were once again excluded from the discussion. We were helpless as we watched rules and directives violated left, right and centre.”
Mpofu said her request was discussed in her absence and that her rights were violated.
“She should have been allowed to participate, not so much as the subject matter but as a person,” he said.
Mpofu also said Dyantyi had relaxed the seven-day rule for submission of an affidavit by Madonsela and went to length to show that they were not at fault for the delay.
The committee had blamed Mkhwebane’s legal team for causing the delay by wanting Madonsela to respond beyond the narrowed scope of evidence agreed to by the committee.
“We could not benefit from the seven-day rule and other rules that allow us to prepare,” Mpofu said.
He also said their request to proceed on Wednesday and Thursday with testimony by Matabego was not a “double delay” as they merely asked for him to be brought forward by two days, not just one, as his testimony would cover several reports.
“We ask that you make a fresh decision.”
Mpofu also said the level of prejudice and bias against Mkhwebane was difficult to stomach, saying the Public Protector had met the committee halfway when Mvuyana was made to testify on Monday and Tuesday though she was not initially scheduled for those days.
He raised concern that no fairness was shown to Mkhwebane when she made reasonable requests to prepare.
“We were saying swap the witnesses. It is a reason for us to be insulted. We were denied an opportunity to prepare,” he said.
Mpofu later told the committee that while he was addressing the committee, they received an amended affidavit from Madonsela, which was nine pages longer than the initial one, that was four pages.
“I have not seen it. It is those issues we want to raise for consideration by the committee,” he said.
Parliamentary legal adviser Fatima Ebrahim said they needed to look at the amended affidavit and asked for a few minutes break.
Mpofu said the amended affidavit “might make things absurd” before asking Dyantyi to grant a 15 minute break and later asked it be extended to 30 minutes.
“Fifteen plus minutes will assist. We will resume at 11.15am. You must be lucky today,” said Dyantyi when acceding to the request.
In response, Mpofu said: “I am shocked.”
The committee will discuss the way forward after the break.
Cape Times