Debate heats up over Dianne Kohler-Barnard's role in Mkhwanazi inquiry

The Ad Hoc Committee probing allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, is embroiled in a contentious debate regarding the recusal of DA MP Dianne Kohler-Barnard.

This discussion follows Mkhwanazi's public accusation at the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry that Kohler-Barnard disclosed classified crime intelligence information, a claim she has adamantly denied.

The issue of Kohler-Barnard's membership on the committee has become a focal point of contention, and although the matter was discussed earlier this week, it was deferred for further discussion until Friday on how to take it forward.

DA MP Glynnis Breytenbach stood firmly in support of Kohler-Barnard, asserting that there is currently no valid reason for her to step down.

“She is very acutely aware of her responsibility regarding conflict of interest. If such a conflict arises, she will act accordingly, but that has not arisen,” Breytenbach said.

However, ANC Chief Whip Mdumiseni Ntuli raised concerns about the committee’s credibility, pointing out that Parliament was informed of the accusations as early as March but took no action until Mkhwanazi's public announcement in July.

Ntuli said Kohler-Barnard’s mention in the commission suggests that some MPs may have been negligent, as they are implicated in the allegations.

His position was clear that Kohler-Barnard should recuse herself to maintain the committee's moral integrity.

“We are raising this issue because we think that the committee must always appear to be morally upright, so that its work and its legitimacy will avoid this Parliament from being seen as people who can't be trusted,” he said.

DA MP Ian Cameron said no one needed to recuse themselves until there was actual evidence presented on conflict being created.

“We can’t simply tell, in my opinion, people to recuse themselves based on a news report,” he said.

EFF leader Julius Malema said Ntuli failed to point out a rule or the committee’s terms of reference that dealt with recusal.

“If you have not dealt with recusal in the terms of reference and there is no specific rule that deals with recusal, we are not in any position to use our majority or feelings when it comes to recusal. The decision lies with the member concerned,” Malema said.

He insisted that there must be a rule on conflict of interest and argued that the committee can’t just remove a member.

“You did not choose who sits and who does not (in the committee),” Malema added.

IFP MP Albert Mncwango echoed Malema’s reference to the rules of Parliament regarding conflict of interest.

“We are constituted by Parliament, which has the power to add or subtract any member. If we are not clear, why not consult legal advice at our disposal so that we can make an informed legal decision in this matter,” Mncwango said.

Patriotic Alliance MP Ashley Sauls said he would have expected Kohler-Barnard to follow the standard set by his party deputy president, Kenny Kunene, who resigned as a councillor and member of a mayoral committee when his name was recently mentioned in connection with the arrest of a prominent suspect.

Sauls expressed a different view on the argument that recusal was not mentioned in the committee’s terms of reference.

“It is disingenuous that terms of reference will be exhaustive in what we deal with,” he said.

Committee Chairperson, Soviet Lekganyane said the issue about Kohler-Barnard would be considered after Mkhwanazi has given his testimony to the committee in October.

“It is at that stage where members, if they have any issue about honourable Barnard, they want to clarify whether the issue is on the statement that General Mkhwanazi would have deposited with us, or whether members say we heard you saying this and that, we want you to clarify the statement,” Lekganyane said.

Meanwhile, the committee has compiled a list of 35 people whom it wants to appear as witnesses.

After a long discussion on whether the evidence leaders should start consulting the people on that list, it was decided to treat it as provisional pending Mkhwanazi’s testimony.

“Let us note that we have a provisional list, without saying that the list has been adopted or not, and these are the reasons that some of the names have been mentioned and some of the names have never been mentioned,” Lekganyane said.