The Constitutional Court on Thursday heard President Cyril Ramaphosa had prepared a draft suspension letter for public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane some time before she sent the 31 Phala Phala questions to him on June 7. 

“The suspension letter was already prepared when the public protector sent the questions to the president, so the suspension couldn't have been retaliatory,” counsel for Ramaphosa, advocate Geoff Budlender, SC, said. 

The apex court is on Thursday hearing three consolidated applications emanating from the judgment by the Western Cape High Court in September declaring the president's decision to suspend her invalid.

The first two applications are for leave to appeal brought by the DA and the president against the high court order.

The third is an urgent application for leave to appeal brought by  Mkhwebane against an October high court ruling that rejected her bid to immediately return to work when a full bench said the ConCourt was yet to  rule on the September order that set aside her suspension. The judges said this order had no force until it was confirmed by the ConCourt.

Mkhwebane previously argued  Ramaphosa “could not bring an unbiased mind to bear” in suspending her because he was conflicted by the investigation arising out of the burglary at his Phala Phala farm.

Budlender Sr argued Mkhwebane's suspension had no personal benefit for the president and though she is suspended, the Phala Phala investigation continues, so nothing changed in Ramaphosa's situation. 

There was nothing hasty about Mkhwebane's suspension as she had already requested several extensions for her to file submissions on why she should not be suspended, so Mkhwebane herself caused a delay in her suspension. 

“It can't be disputed that the case for suspension was truly overwhelming,” Budlender Sr said. 

The hearing continues. 

TimesLIVE