In an afternoon of high drama, angry opposition MPs accused National Assembly Speaker Max Sisulu of "protecting" Zuma by attempting to stop questions about the police building lease scandal.

PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma came under fire from opposition MPs who wanted answers for his missing a deadline set for him to take action against Public Works Minister Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde for her role in the police building lease scandal.

In an afternoon of high drama, angry opposition MPs accused National Assembly Speaker Max Sisulu of "protecting" Zuma by attempting to stop questions about the police building lease scandal.

The drama began when DA MP Marti Wenger used a supplementary question on local government to sneak in another question, asking Zuma why he had not yet taken action against Mahlangu-Nkabinde as suggested by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela in her findings.

Wenger said: "I would like to remind this house that the public works minister has yet to account to the cabinet, to this house, (and) to the South African people for her illegal actions in respect of the South African Police Service lease deal and has been backed by the cabinet in her refusal to provide an explanation."

Mahlangu-Nkabinde was criticised by Madonsela for ignoring legal opinion that the R500million Pretoria building lease and the R1,1billion leasing of the Transnet Tower in Durban from businessman Roux Shabangu was illegal.

Madonsela has urged Zuma to consider taking action against Mahlangu-Nkabinde, and has also advised that Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa take action against police commissioner General Bheki Cele for his role in the saga.

Zuma has yet to do so.

ANC MP Mike Masutha protested before Zuma could respond to Wenger's question, saying the assertion that Mahlangu-Nkabinde had committed illegal actions had not been substantiated by any finding.

A war of words erupted when Sisulu agreed with Masutha that Schaffer's question was out of order.

"The matter is before parliamentary committees, and those committees have not yet reported to the house," said Sisulu.

DA Chief Whip Ian Davidson and his deputy Mike Ellis, however, sharply differed with the Speaker, arguing that the committees processing the matter were not necessarily obliged to report back to the National Assembly.

This drew in Cope leader Mosiuoa Lekota, who insisted that Zuma be ordered to answer the question as the Public Protector had already made findings regarding Mahlangu-Nkabinde's involvement.

Sisulu was adamant, however, that the Public Protector's findings against Mahlangu-Nkabinde and Cele were only allegations, adding: "The minister has not been found guilty by any court of law."

Lekota informed Sisulu that he was wrong in classifying the Public Protector's report as containing only allegations, adding: "They are findings, sir. It means allegations have been investigated and findings have been made. Please correct yourself, sir."

ANC Chief Whip Mathole Motshekga rose in defence of both Zuma and Sisulu, saying the Public Protector report had been referred to parliament and was being processed by the relevant committees, who - at the appropriate time - would forward it to the National Assembly.

Motshekga added: "This has nothing to do with the president."

But Cope MP Juli Killian differed with Motshekga, saying as a Chapter 9 institution had made the findings, Zuma was constitutionally bound to account to parliament.

Responding to the furore, Zuma questioned why he was being forced to respond to issues related to the police lease scandal when he had initially been asked a parliamentary question relating to local government.

But he assured MPs that he was not shying away from taking action against those fingered in the Public Protector's report.

"I'm sure members are anxious to hear about this matter. Its time will come," Zuma said.

Madonsela has threatened to subpoena Mahlangu-Nkabinde to explain her role after the 60-day deadline the minister had been given expired at midnight on Monday without a word from her.