The High Court in Pretoria has questioned whether the process of appointing Lieutenant-General Berning Ntlmeza as head of the Hawks was not a sham because the selection panel had not seen a judgment that could have impacted his appointment.
On Wednesday‚ Judge Selby Baqwa posed the question as the court heard the second day of arguments in an application by lobby groups to have Ntlemeza’s 2015 appointment as the head of the Hawks‚ by Police Minister Nathi Nhleko‚ reviewed.
Their application stemmed from comments made by the court’s Judge Elias Matojane‚ last year‚ that Ntlemeza was biased‚ dishonest and lacked integrity and honour.
Matojane made the statement as he was dismissing Ntlemeza’s application for leave to appeal against the court’s ruling that overturned Gauteng Hawks head Shadrack Sibiya’s suspension.
Sibiya and Hawks commander Anwa Dramat were suspended after they were implicated in the illegal rendition of Zimbabwean nationals in 2010. Sibiya was fired for his alleged role last year.
Ntlemeza is said to have not informed the court of evidence exonerating Sibiya‚ electing to only use the evidence that implicated him.
The lobby groups said the position required a person of integrity and honesty‚ and Matojane’s remarks showed that Ntlemeza did not have that.
In court documents‚ Nhleko said he had seen the judgment but had not considered it because doing so would have been irrational because the comments were not ventilated in court.
The minister‚ who said the comments were not binding because they were not ventilated in court‚ did not provide the panel with the judgment only discussing it with the panel.
On Tuesday Ntlemeza’s representative‚ advocate William Mukhari SC‚ said that the decision to appoint Ntlemeza was ultimately up to Nhleko‚ who had gone above and beyond what was required of him by putting together the panel because he could make the decision on his own.
Baqwa had a problem with that saying it disqualified the panel which made recommendations to the minister about the appointment.
“The whole thing [selection process] became a sham‚” said Baqwa.
He said the court was getting bogged down in doing what the panel was supposed to have done had the minister considered the judgment.
“Isn’t the challenge that when the minister read the judgement he put it aside and didn’t consider it‚” said Baqwa.
Puleng Seleka SC‚ who is representing Nhleko‚ argued that the relevance of Malojane’s comments was what had to be considered.
He also said the manner in which Nhleko approached the appointment did not taint the process and that the minister had considered the comments.
TMG Digital/BusinessLive
Court questions whether Ntlemeza’s appointment process a sham
The High Court in Pretoria has questioned whether the process of appointing Lieutenant-General Berning Ntlmeza as head of the Hawks was not a sham because the selection panel had not seen a judgment that could have impacted his appointment.
On Wednesday‚ Judge Selby Baqwa posed the question as the court heard the second day of arguments in an application by lobby groups to have Ntlemeza’s 2015 appointment as the head of the Hawks‚ by Police Minister Nathi Nhleko‚ reviewed.
Their application stemmed from comments made by the court’s Judge Elias Matojane‚ last year‚ that Ntlemeza was biased‚ dishonest and lacked integrity and honour.
Matojane made the statement as he was dismissing Ntlemeza’s application for leave to appeal against the court’s ruling that overturned Gauteng Hawks head Shadrack Sibiya’s suspension.
Sibiya and Hawks commander Anwa Dramat were suspended after they were implicated in the illegal rendition of Zimbabwean nationals in 2010. Sibiya was fired for his alleged role last year.
Ntlemeza is said to have not informed the court of evidence exonerating Sibiya‚ electing to only use the evidence that implicated him.
The lobby groups said the position required a person of integrity and honesty‚ and Matojane’s remarks showed that Ntlemeza did not have that.
In court documents‚ Nhleko said he had seen the judgment but had not considered it because doing so would have been irrational because the comments were not ventilated in court.
The minister‚ who said the comments were not binding because they were not ventilated in court‚ did not provide the panel with the judgment only discussing it with the panel.
On Tuesday Ntlemeza’s representative‚ advocate William Mukhari SC‚ said that the decision to appoint Ntlemeza was ultimately up to Nhleko‚ who had gone above and beyond what was required of him by putting together the panel because he could make the decision on his own.
Baqwa had a problem with that saying it disqualified the panel which made recommendations to the minister about the appointment.
“The whole thing [selection process] became a sham‚” said Baqwa.
He said the court was getting bogged down in doing what the panel was supposed to have done had the minister considered the judgment.
“Isn’t the challenge that when the minister read the judgement he put it aside and didn’t consider it‚” said Baqwa.
Puleng Seleka SC‚ who is representing Nhleko‚ argued that the relevance of Malojane’s comments was what had to be considered.
He also said the manner in which Nhleko approached the appointment did not taint the process and that the minister had considered the comments.
TMG Digital/BusinessLive
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos