Political parties and analysts have welcomed the decision made by the Department of Defence and Military Veterans to refuse to pay the legal fees of its former minister and former National Assembly Speaker, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula.
The minister handed herself to police in April after being charged with 12 counts of corruption and one of money laundering. She is out on bail.
Zakhele Ndlovu, a political science lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, said it is entirely wrong for taxpayer’s money to be used in this way.
“It’s the taxpayers that are footing the bill for legal fees for government officials and this should not be allowed. We saw this with former president Jacob Zuma, where the taxpayers were paying for his legal fees. This should be condemned in the strongest sense.”
Ndlovu said he agrees with the decision of the department.
“Ministers are earning such high salaries and they still want to pass their responsibility of paying to government departments and taxpayers. They have the money and should pay their own bills. I feel it should be declared illegal for government officials to call on government departments to pay their legal fees.”
Bheki Mngomezulu, a professor of Political Science and International Relations at the Nelson Mandela University, said taxpayers are in an unfair situation.
“It is unfair that taxpayers have to foot the bill for officials and their families, travel accommodation, transport and toll fees, and still they are called upon to pay the legal fees of a former minister facing corruption charges.”
Mngomezulu added that there were two things to consider. “When applying for her legal fees to be paid, she was allowed to apply if the charges happened while she was in office as minister of defence and if she was performing her duties.
“However, on this occasion the department decided that although charges happened while she was in office, it was not part of her duties but in her personal capacity. It’s still unfair on taxpayers and the only way this can change is if we revisit the Constitution and the benefits for ministers.”
Legal expert Vuyo Manisi said the request was refused because the allegations against the minister are not linked to the execution of her duties.
“To put it into more context, when you sue a policeman who assaults you during the course of executing his duties, that policeman will be defended by the State as the allegations of assault are linked to the execution of his duties.”
IFP national spokesperson Mkhuleko Hlengwa said the decision by the Department of Defence and Military Veterans to decline Mapisa-Nqakula’s request was correct.
“The allegations against the former speaker are personal in nature and accordingly she is personally responsible and accountable.”
Kobus Marais, DA spokesperson on defence and military veterans, said the ex-minister had no justification for asking for financial assistance.
“It’s arrogant, with no respect for the laws and the financial predicaments of the SANDF. No minister or high-ranking official should be so arrogant as to expect taxpayers to pay for their legal costs to fund their corruption and maladministration charges.”
Minister of Defence Thandi Modise said that they concluded that the former minister’s application was not eligible for state-sponsored legal representation.
“Section 6.2 of the State Legal Representation Policy states that the cover applies to any claim lodged or commenced against any person arising from and/or directly connected with an alleged act and/or omission on the part of applicant in the execution of official duties.
“Guided by this policy, we have come to a conclusion that the allegations levelled against the former minister are not linked to the execution of her duties at the time. Correspondence to this effect has been sent to the applicant and the matter is now officially closed,” said Modise.
The Mercury