Cape Town – Public Protector advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane has noted the North Gauteng High Court’s decision to strike out the vitriol that Public Enterperises Minister Pravin Gordhan directed at her in litigation.
However, this was a small victory as she lost yet another legal battle on Monday after her report into the existence of a “rogue unit” at the SA Revenue Service (Sars) was reviewed and set aside.
Unbowed, Public Protector spokesperson Oupa Segalwe said she would ’’study the grounds upon which the court set aside her evidence-based findings and the related appropriate remedial action, with a view to exploring the options available to her’’.
She would feel vindicated that a full bench had rebuked Gordhan for his “irrelevant, scandalous and prejudicial” comments. She had applied to the court to strike out a number of paragraphs in Gordhan’s founding affidavit, saying these allegations did not belong in court papers by a “self-respecting member of the national executive”.
Gordhan had said he doubted Mkhwebane’s competence, integrity, legal literacy and her constitutional grasp of her powers, duties and functions. He further declared that she was unfit for office and had ulterior and political motives.
Mkhwebane had released the report last July which investigated the alleged violation of the Executive Ethics Code by Gordhan as well as allegations of maladministration at Sars during his tenure.
Gordhan and former Sars deputy commissioner Ivan Pillay had sought to have the report reviewed, set aside and declared unlawful as he accused Mkhwebane of relying on discredited reports and failing to take into account “extensive evidence that was placed before her” during the course of her investigation.
The high court found Mkhwebane’s report and findings to be without foundation as they were based on “discredited reports and unsubstantiated facts”.
Maintaining after the ruling that “evidence abounds’’ of the alleged unlawful operations of the Sars rogue unit, Segalwe said: ’’The report focused purely on the laws that were breached when an illegal intelligence unit was established at Sars and the unlawful operations the unit engaged in. Evidence to this effect abounds.
’’Nonetheless, with the help of her legal team, Advocate Mkhwebane will study the grounds upon which the court set aside her evidence-based findings and the related appropriate remedial action, with a view to exploring the options available to her.
’’But while skimming through the judgment, she took note of the court’s decision to strike out the vitriol that Minister Gordhan directed at her in litigation, with the full bench labelling such inappropriate behaviour by the Minister ’irrelevant, scandalous and prejudicial’.
’’In court papers, the Minister had said he doubted Advocate Mkhwebane’s competence, integrity, legal literacy and her constitutional grasp of her powers, duties and functions. He further launched into a tirade against her, saying she was unfit for office, had ulterior and political motives.
’’He has to date failed to prove those motives both in court and as recently as last week at the State Capture Commission…
’’Until she has thoroughly studied the judgment, Advocate Mkhwebane will not make further comments on the matter.’’
IOL