Mkhwebane's interdict bid won't be funded by state

Taxpayers will not fund suspended public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s bid to interdict her suspension but will fork out money as she fights the ongoing parliamentary process to impeach her.

Acting public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka withdrew an application at the Western Cape high court seeking to interdict impeachment proceedings against Mkhwebane and set aside her suspension by President Cyril Ramaphosa.

In a statement, the public protector's spokesperson, Oupa Segalwe, said the office had taken a decision to withdraw the institution’s participation in all pending litigation instituted by Mkhwebane in the name of the institution.

However, he said caution had been taken not to interfere with Mkhwebane’s preparations in line with the critical safeguards of the impeachment process that had been highlighted by the Constitutional Court and the high court.

“The public protector SA will not fund advocate Mkhwebane’s appeal against the recent decision of the Western Cape high court, where she sought to obtain an urgent interdict to prevent her suspension; the rescission application pending before the Constitutional Court and the defamation of character lawsuit, which is a private matter against the Democratic Alliance.”

However, the public protector's office will fund the challenge to her suspension, her defence during the impeachment proceedings and the criminal perjury case.

The perjury case concerns her report on the Reserve Bank’s bailout of Bankorp. In 2019, the Constitutional Court found that Mkhwebane had acted in bad faith and put forward a number of falsehoods in the Absa/Bankorp review case.

Earlier this week, Mkhwebane’s attorneys, Seanago Attorneys, filed an application for leave to appeal against the Western Cape high court judgment that refused to grant her an interim “part A” interdict to put a stop to impeachment proceedings in parliament and prevent her suspension by Ramaphosa.

When Mkhwebane lost "part A" she sought to have “part B” of her case in the Western Cape high court to set aside her challenge for her suspension as well all the steps taken so far in the impeachment process, which she wanted heard on an urgent basis.

She had amended her court papers in this part of her case. This had been scheduled for July 25 and 26.

Segalwe said Mkhwebane’s legal representatives should have obtained permission from Gcalekwa before filing the amended notion in respect to case to set aside her challenge  for her suspension to be urgently heard.

“The legal representatives’ last authority to act on behalf of the PPSA was signed as far back as 2019 by the then CEO to challenge the parliamentary rules for the removal of office bearers of institutions supporting constitutional democracy.”

Essentially, Segalwe said Seanago Attorneys acted beyond the scope they were employed for.