Cape Town - Arguments over procedural issues took up the beginning of Wednesday’s hearings of the parliamentary committee investigating suspended Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness for office.
At the start of proceedings, the committee evidence leader Nazreen Bawa SC proposed cross-examining Mkhwebane on the testimony she had given so far.
Bawa said that as Mkhwebane’s senior counsel, Dali Mpofu, had reached the end of Mkhwebane’s evidence with respect to the CR17/Bosasa investigation and report.
She and the committee could ask their questions on that matter while it was still fresh in their minds.
The report and investigation by the Office of the Public Protector refers to the 2017 donor funding campaign for President Cyril Ramaphosa, who was then the deputy president of the ANC.
Bawa suggested that doing this before Mpofu headed into his next subject, which is the alleged rogue unit at Sars, would make it easier for both her team and Mpofu to write their heads of arguments when the hearings eventually come to a close.
Bawa said as the CR17/Bosasa issue had covered a lot of ground and it was expected that the other topics would do the same, changing the committee’s procedures in this way would help speed things up.
“The committee currently has fresh in their mind that which has been put to them over the last few days in respect of CR17.
“It would dovetail with me putting the questions to the witness now, while it’s also fresh in her mind, rather than in three weeks’ time, four weeks’ time or two months’ time depending on how things go in this inquiry.”
Bawa argued that the impeachment proceedings were a novel process, and the timetable had changed a number of times. She also said Mkhwebane was not just any witness but the subject of the hearings.
Anticipating an objection from Mpofu on the issue, Bawa made a second suggestion in which she could wait for him to conclude the Sars matter and then be allowed to question the witness on both Sars and CR17.
Committee chairperson Qubudile Dyantyi allowed Mpofu to respond before he made his ruling on the matter.
Mpofu argued that the committee’s directives were very clear on the issue and said that while he sympathised with Bawa about the bulkiness of the evidence before them, he thought her suggestion was “completely impractical and unworkable.”
Turning down Bawa’s request in his ruling, Dyantyi said he understood Bawa’s reasoning but that while her arguments were persuasive, he had to remain consistent with regards to strictly following the committee’s directives and timetable.
Bawa said she would ask again after Mpofu completed taking Mkhwebane through her evidence on the Sars rogue unit matter.
Meanwhile, when he began taking Mkhwebane through her testimony, Mpofu returned to the issue, which led to Mkhwebane referring the CR17 matter to the NPA on suspicion that there had been money laundering.
Mkhwebane’s suspicions in the matter were based on the fact that there was a movement of money between the CR17 accounts.
mwangi.githahu@inl.co.za