By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
Suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane has written to President Cyril Ramaphosa requesting him to intervene in the issue involving her legal fees.
Mkhwebane’s letter to Ramaphosa, follows her threat on Tuesday to take further legal action after the Section 194 Committee continued without her lawyers present.
The Committee entered the third day on Wednesday without Mkhwebane’s legal representatives after acting Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka told her the office could not fund her legal fees.
In her letter, Mkhwebane gives Ramaphosa until 1pm on Thursday to respond to her requests, failing which will result in further legal steps “in order to protect my violated rights”.
Mkhwebane requested Ramaphosa “to ensure the instruction to extend the benefits attached to the position of Public Protector, which must include the provision of legal and other support while accounting to the National Assembly, are provided as a matter of urgency,” and “to uplift the suspension in view of the halting of the proceedings, in terms of section 194 (3)(a) of the Constitution”.
She said her suspension was valid until “the finalisation of the proceedings/inquiry initiated by the Committee of the National Assembly established in terms of section 194 of the Constitution.”
The proceedings have not been finalised yet.
“Failure to fulfil the constitutional obligations separately outlined above, by no later than 1pm on 6 April 2023, will result in my taking further legal steps in order to protect my violated rights,” said Mkhwebane in her letter.
The Constitutional Court ruled in February last year that Mkhwebane is entitled to full legal representation for the impeachment proceedings. It did not, however, indicate who should foot the bill.
This has left the committee, which is looking into her fitness to hold office, with a dilemma since Mkhwebane was entitled to full legal representation in the hearings.
Parliamentary legal advisor Fatima Ebrahim indicated that the public protector would have at least two opportunities to respond to the evidence.
“The first is the intention that the public protector herself must appear before [the committee] and answer the questions of members and the evidence leaders if they have any questions to put to her.
“The process of the evidence leaders now seeks to equip members to ask those questions… That’s anything that may be disputed, any gaps or contradictions that may arise as a result of the evidence that is being presented can be dealt with.
The second opportunity that the public protector will be given is to comment on the draft report and the purpose of that was in case the committee missed or misunderstood anything [so] there should be another final opportunity for the public protector to place any corrections or anything she wanted the committee to consider further on record,”she said.
She added that it would be ideal if Mkhwebane’s legal team was present, but highlighted that the committee also has a duty to finish its work “in a reasonable timeframe”.
Ebrahim further dismissed the suggestion Mkhwebane’s right to full legal representation was being denied by the committee proceeding to deal with the evidence.