By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
Impeached former Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane says she will not respond on the matter of her gratuity until that she receives official communication from the Office of the Public Protector.
Mkhwebane is seeking to claim at least R10 million in gratuity payment following her removal from office by President Cyril Ramaphosa in September 2023.
Fullview understands that the public protector’s office has determined Mkhwebane does not qualify for the payment based on how she left office.
She did not finish her term following a vote by Parliament on the recommendation of a lengthy and costly multiparty Section 194 inquiry which found her guilty of incompetence and misconduct and recommended her removal from office.
The law, according to Mkhwebane, entitles public servants “even after being dismissed … to a certain portion of their benefits”.
This is not the first occasion that a former Public Protector has had to forfeit a portion of their “gratuity”, albeit the previous matter involving Thuli Madonsela occurred in vastly different circumstances.
Madonsela, was paid R7.6m in gratuity at the end of her nonrenewable seven-year term.
After Madonsela completed her term of office, exiting with a bang and the State Capture report which led to the State Capture Commission, Mkhwebane arbitrarily deducted an amount from Madonsela’s payout.
Back in 2016, R470,000 was docked from Madonsela’s R4-million “gratuity” for repairs to an official vehicle paid for by the office.
The office of the public protector is said to have told Mkhwebane that it could not find a law in either the constitution or the Public Protector Act under which it could justify making the payment.
In fact, Mkhwebane owes the public purse R4-million which her office paid to the Department of Public Works for her rental of a luxury home in the Bryntirion Ministerial Estate in Pretoria.
Mkhwebane spent almost her entire tenure living among the individuals over whom she had oversight.
Constitutional law expert Professor Pierre de Vos weighed-in and said, “this isn’t a constitutional matter, but something to be determined by the conditions of service agreement concluded when she took office.”
From a legal perspective, said De Vos, it was “clear as can be. It provides for a gratuity if she completes her term and for payment of minor benefits, even if she is impeached, but makes clear she is not entitled to a gratuity if she is removed from office before her term ends.”