By Jan Gerber.
The Section 194 Committee inquiring into Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness for office lost another day of testimony on Wednesday when a witness refused to testify after he received an intimidating text message.
Public Protector chief investigator Rodney Mataboge started his testimony on Tuesday.
After being sworn in, he expressed concern about publicly testifying.
He said, as an investigator, he felt vulnerable about appearing before the committee.
“We’ve got a problem with whistleblowers that needs protection in our society,” he said.
“Am I being exposed now to the outside world?”
After his testimony, he received a text message, and this was brought to the committee’s attention on Tuesday evening.
The full message reads:
Mr Rodney Mataboge i have been waiting patiently to listen to your testimony of section 194 in parliament.
I am Mokgele Mojaki. You were hellbent on producing an adverse report on me in Ngaka Modiri Molema.
You failed to sustain your shenanigans in court, you are not an honest person.
I hope you are exposed. No wonder you have been called as a witness by the very person you have been misleading.
You deliberately tried to frustrate me but at the end [I] was vindicated.
You will never practice outside that office because you are not worth to be an advocate.
Now you are live, the whole country is watching you.
Karma is a bitch.
I have been patiently [waiting] to see you exposing yourself.
You are good in hiding evidence rule 53 records of all the cases lost by the public protectors office where you were involved.
You should hang your head in shame.
Mataboge was scheduled to continue his testimony on Wednesday morning.
At the start of Wednesday’s meeting, the committee’s legal advisor, Fatima Ebrahim, advised the committee to attend to a matter which arose overnight, behind closed doors. It meant involving only committee members and support staff, excluding the evidence leaders, Mkhwebane and her team, and the media and public.
More than two hours later, the meeting was opened again.
“It has taken longer than I thought it would,” said the chairperson of the committee, Qubudile Dyantyi.
He added that it became apparent the committee had to apply its collective mind.
He said Mataboge shared with Ebrahim a text message from an “ordinary South African”. The message was shown publicly at the committee meeting.
Dyantyi said: We felt that the work of this committee was being impeded by the sending of such a message to a witness that is here in this committee yesterday [Tuesday].
Dyantyi noted that Mataboge raised the protection of witnesses ahead of his testimony on Tuesday.
“We are of the firm view that it can’t be allowed and just be allowed to proceed where a witness who is here gets a text message from whoever, to a point where our work would then be impeded.”
Dyantyi said the committee had the “firm view” that everybody needed to know who this person was.
The committee decided to contact Mojaki, to ask that he put his complaints in writing and desist from interacting with the witness.
It also sought Mataboge’s view, while they met in camera, and they were of the view that its witnesses must be protected.
Dyantyi added: We have to be consistent to ensure that this process is fair and rational.
Dyantyi said a number of witnesses who appeared before the committee “endured this risk” and that the committee had received submissions “either whilst a witness was on the stand or after, where people were writing to us to say this witness is mentioning my name, or this witness is not saying the correct things”.
Dyantyi said Mataboge’s testimony doesn’t meet the criteria for an in camera hearing in terms of Parliament’s rules.
He said the message had nothing to do with what Mataboge testified about on Tuesday.
“It is a text that relates to previous work,” he said.
“It looks to us there is an inherent risk in the job that they are doing as investigators at the [Public Protector South Africa].”
He said the committee would ask the Office of the Public Protector to “do what it must do to protect Mataboge”.
Mataboge indicated that he would seek legal advice about being subpoenaed by the committee because he intended not to proceed with his testimony.
Dyantyi said: We don’t have an option, as a committee, not to conclude his testimony. As a result, we have decided, therefore, that we are going to subpoena Mataboge.
He would be subpoenaed to appear on Thursday and Friday, as scheduled.
Ebrahim indicated that National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula had already consented to issue the subpoena.
In 2017, the Public Protector issued a report with adverse findings against Mojaki, who was, at the time, the municipal manager for Ngaka Modiri Molema municipality in the North West.
“The report follows an investigation into the alleged maladministration, corruption, nepotism, fruitless and wasteful expenditure and purging of staff by the former municipal manager, Mokgele Mojaki, at Ngaka Modiri Molema District Municipality,” reads the Public Protector’s annual report for 2016-17.
“The complainants are former employees of the municipality who were either suspended, dismissed or engaged in labour disputes against the employer for raising concerns about the appointment of the municipal manager, and maladministration and irregular appointment of staff and service providers.”
The investigation found “Mojaki irregularly appointed several officials on acting and permanent positions that were allegedly not approved or not provided for in the organisational structure and/or budget” – and that Mojaki “failed to follow proper recruitment procedures by failing to advertise, shortlist and interview candidates” for certain vacant positions.
It found that Mojaki was “involved in the systemic purging of 25 municipal employees between 2012 and 2014, who had raised questions and concerns about the alleged irregularities within the municipality”.
The investigation also found that Mojaki’s “conduct constitutes financial misconduct” and that he “failed to follow proper tender processes”.
Among the Public Protector’s remedial findings was that the municipality institute civil proceedings against Mojaki “for the recovery of all monies lost by the municipality as a result of his ineptitude and abuse of authority in respect of his conduct”.
It said the municipality must investigate whether “the reimbursement which was due to the North West premier’s office by the municipality for Mr Mojaki’s secondment salary did take place and, if not, take appropriate steps against the officials responsible for such financial misconduct”.