Judge lashes protector over Sarb application

‘It is disconcerting that she seems impervious to the criticism, or disinclined to address it’

PUBLIC Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane has come under fire for interfering with the mandate of the South African Reserve Bank after the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, ruled against her yesterday.

Parliament and the Banking Association of South Africa (Basa) said the judgment was a lesson for Mkhwebane to stop interfering with the Sarb or any other such institution.

The chairperson of the portfolio committee on justice and correctional services, Mathole Motshekga, said the judgment had made it clear to Mkhwebane that she had exceeded her boundaries.

In her report Mkhwebane had asked the portfolio committee to amend the constitution and change the mandate of the Sarb. She set August 18 as the deadline for Parliament to give her a progress report on this.

But Speaker Baleka Mbete had opposed the application and said Mkhwebane was intruding on the powers of Parliament.

Reserve Bank governor Lesetja Kganyago also welcomed the judgment of the court yesterday. He said this had clarified the role and the powers of the Sarb.

Two weeks ago, Kganyago told the standing committee on finance that the application by Mbete had bolstered their case.

In a scathing judgment, Judge John Murphy described the findings and recommendations by Mkhwebane as irrational.

“It is disconcerting that she seems impervious to the criticism, or otherwise disinclined to address it. This court is not unsympathetic to the difficult task of the public protector.

“She is expected to deal with at times complex and challenging matters with limited resources and without the benefit of rigorous forensic techniques,” said Murphy.

“She would do well to reflect more deeply on her conduct of this investigation and the criticism of her by the governor of the Reserve Bank and the Speaker of Parliament,” he said.

Mkhwebane had decided not to contest the application by the Sarb on its mandate.

Motshekga said the judgment provided clarity on the separation of powers.

“The committee firmly agrees with the court decision that the remedial action of the public protector in this regard moved on to a terrain that is solely for Parliament to decide on,” he said.

Basa managing director Cas Coovadia said the judgment was scathing and this was a lesson for the public protector.

“The decision of the court is not surprising. When the public protector issued her report in June we said it was not within her mandate to change the mandate of the Sarb.”

Coovadia said the judgment confirmed the mandate of the Sarb.