Busisiwe Mkhwebane leaves section 194 committee after evidence leaders called to present evidence

Public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane left the section 194 inquiry into her fitness to hold office on Monday morning, after committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi asked evidence leaders to make a presentation to the committee.

Mkhwebane had told the inquiry she would not be proceeding as she did not have legal representation. 

Mkhwebane explained to Dyantyi that after deputy public protector Kholeka Gcaleka wrote a letter on March 1, indicating there would be no legal funding for her appearance before the enquiry from April 1, this placed her in a position where she could not give further instruction to her legal team.

The Constitutional Court held, in a judgment passed last year, that when the section 194 enquiry formally proceeds, the public protector would be entitled to full legal representation in the proceedings. 

Dyantyi wanted the evidence leaders to brief the committee on the evidence that had been presented by Mkhwebane in the past six days. 

A number of committee members said it would not be possible to continue without Mkhwebane being legally represented.  

Mkhwebane told Dyantyi she had not finished with her evidence, while Dyantyi had ruled last week that evidence leaders should cross-examine before she finished her evidence.

“How do I then sit here without my legal team? I will have a legal team assisting me to note all the issues. So that when I continue presenting my evidence, they also know what the issues are. I do not think that will be proper and fair.”

She said what would be fair, was if there were “all hands on deck” to find resources so the inquiry could proceed.

After the tea break, Dyantyi said the committee would discontinue the inquiry and proceed with a committee session. 

“I would ask (evidence leader) advocate (Nazreen) Bawa to take members through the parts that I Indicated are important so that we save time when the inquiry resumes. This committee meeting is still open to everybody.”

This prompted Mkhwebane to address Dyantyi again, saying this was not a proper process to proceed with.

“It impedes and violates my rights because of what they are going to be saying in the process.”

She said this was illegal and unethical and said she would possibly lodge a complaint against the evidence leaders to the Legal Practice Council.

“I am putting this on record. (Bawa) is addressing evidence I presented without my legal team.”

Dyantyi replied this was a public meeting and nobody was barred from joining it, adding this was a committee session, which was meant for the participation of the members. 

“There is evidence that was placed for six days. We are going to assist the committee to unpack the issues for it to be ready.

“This is something we would have done when evidence leaders start asking you questions. Today they are not asking the questions.”

Mkhwebane then asked to be excused and left.

Even after she left, some committee members felt the committee should not continue. MP Omphile Maotwe said she was not sure what Dyantyi was asking Bawa to do. Maotwe said if this was now a committee meeting, Bawa should have left.

“Because you said the next sitting is a committee sitting, for committee members. She is not a member. She leads evidence inside the enquiry. Outside the inquiry what is she doing? If you want us to have committee meeting, explain what we are meeting for,” Maotwe said.

MP Bantu Holomisa asked for the committee to get advice from parliamentary legal services on whether evidence leaders could brief the committee without the presence of the legal team representing Mkhwebane. Dyantyi said this was not necessary.

However, MP Doris Dlakude said the committee should proceed with the briefing by evidence leaders who are trying their best to empower the committee.

TimesLIVE