By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Section 194 inquiry committee probing suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office has been postponed to Wednesday.
It was initially scheduled for Monday, but her legal team said they’re not ready.
The long-running inquiry is under pressure from Parliament to conclude its work due to the financial and time implications.
Mkhwebane’s term of office ends on 14 October.
Mkhwebane’s newly appointed attorney Hope Chaane asked for an “indefinite postponement”.
Chaane said Mkhwebane’s team wasn’t ready to proceed on Monday, as they had only gained access to the inquiry’s vast documentary evidence on Thursday, and that they were only informed that the hearings would resume on Friday afternoon.
He wrote: “We believe this is not sufficient time for us and our client to prepare for the appearance on 5 June 2023.”
Section 194 committee chair Qubudile Dyantyi, was unhappy that this was brought to his attention at the “eleventh hour”, decided to allow them a “reprieve” and resume on Wednesday.
Meanwhile, National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula responded strongly to claims by Mkhwebane that she dismissed her allegations three ANC MPs had attempted to extort her.
This follows a claim by Mkhwebane that three high-profile MPs attempted to extort R600,000 from her in exchange for squashing the inquiry into her fitness to hold office.
The MPs reportedly include Dyantyi, ANC Chief Whip Pemmy Majodina and former cabinet minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson.
Parliament’s spokesperson Moloto Mothapo says Mapisa-Nqakula is concerned by the allegations.
“It is blatantly false and malicious that the Speaker has dismissed Mkhwebane’s serious claims or her request for a meeting. The Speaker is not in a position to either investigate, make findings or ‘dismiss’ allegations made against Members of Parliament.
“It is for this reason that when Mkhwebane asked her for guidance or a ‘way-forward’ on how to deal with her allegations, as per her letter, she immediately advised her on the appropriate procedure – which was to lodge a complaint with the Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests.”
Mothapo says Mkhwebane’s claim that the speaker exposed her as a whistle-blower seems to be designed to mislead the public.
“The speaker had kept the details of her email exchange with Mkhwebane confidential and only issued a public statement after the matter was made public through the media.
“The media story included the contents of a letter, which appear to have been leaked to the journalist as it was exclusively sent to Advocate Mkhwebane by the speaker in response to her request for a meeting.
“The media story also published the comments of Mkhwebane on the letter she received from the speaker, thereby making it obvious that she is a complainant, or a ‘whistle-blower’ in the matter,” he added.
Mkhwebane’s husband, David Skosana, had since laid a complaint with the police, alleging that Joemat-Pettersson had solicited a bribe on behalf of herself, Dyantyi and Majodina.