BuzzSouthAfrica can confirm that the Democratic Alliance (DA) party will initiate removal proceedings against Public Protector, Busisiwe Mkhwebane.
It was revealed that the Public Protector first consulted President Jacob Zuma’s legal advisors and discussed further recommendations not included in her initial report into the ABSA/Bankorp bailout.
According to the opposition party, this revelation was made in the annexures to the supplementary affidavit filed by the South African Reserve Bank (SARB).
With that, the party affirmed the removal proceedings against Public Protector as necessary. The revelations “casts serious doubt as to her independence.” To them, it has clearly demonstrated that the Public Protector does not operate in an impartial manner, she takes orders from the Union Buildings, DA expressed.
Having said that, the party divulged that it will write to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Baleka Mbete about its intent. DA would request that the relevant Portfolio Committee, in terms of Rule 337 and 338 of the National Assembly Rules, take charge of the case against Mkhwebane.
“Specifically, the DA in the Committee will call for removal proceedings to be initiated urgently.
“In terms of Section 194 of the Constitution, the Portfolio Committee has the power to make a finding of ‘misconduct, incapacity, or incompetence’ against the Public Protector.
Thereafter, the National Assembly must adopt a resolution calling for removal, which requires a two-thirds majority,” stated DA.
Furthermore, the party specified that it has always believed Mkhwebane is unfit to hold the office because of the following reasons:
- She failed to act when President Jacob Zuma was trying to interdict the release of the State Capture report last year. This gave the first inkling of her bias;
- She jumped to the defense of the President by laying criminal charges against former Public Protector, Advocate Thuli Madonsela, for releasing the transcript of her interview with the President;
- She has been sitting on key Gupta-related investigations for months; and
- Admitted to stepping outside of her mandate by recommending changing the Constitution regarding the mandate of the SARB. This shows she has very poor understanding of her own powers and the limits thereof.
Thereafter, Maimane’s party pointed out that the Public Protector is Constitutionally mandated to investigate misconduct by government departments and protect public’s interest.
With reference to that, DA emphasized it’s uncool for the Public Protector to act “in the interest of … captured Number 1.” She must be removed before she further compromises the once proud office, DA charged.