Moyane mulls court as inquiries loom

Suspended SA Revenue Service commissioner Tom Moyane has lost all the objections he lodged against the disciplinary inquiry he is facing.

This means the disciplinary inquiry‚ as well as the commission of inquiry into governance and administration at SARS‚ can proceed – unless Moyane takes his objections to court‚ which he has threatened to do.

The chairman of the inquiry‚ advocate Azhar Bham‚ in a written ruling‚ dismisses the objections and directs Moyane to deliver a “substantive response” to each of the charges he faces by August 20.

Bham has asked parties to be available between September 17 and 28 for the disciplinary hearing.

The three main issues were the right to oral evidence or cross-examination; the admissibility and content of the affidavit by former finance minister Pravin Gordhan in the disciplinary matter; and the “parallel inquiries” in which Moyane is at the centre.

Moyane wants the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses against him.

He wants Gordhan’s affidavit to be discarded and for President Cyril Ramaphosa to halt one of the two processes under way: either the disciplinary inquiry against him or the commission of inquiry into governance and administration at SARS.

In dismissing the first objection on written versus oral evidence‚ Bham essentially ruled that Moyane was not deprived of oral evidence as the terms of reference left this open to him to decide on as the chairperson of the inquiry.

He agreed with Ramaphosa’s legal team on whether Gordhan had the authority to depose the affidavit in Moyane’s inquiry‚ indicating Gordhan had done so as a witness‚ which he says does not require statutory authority.

“What is required is that they testify to matters which are in their knowledge and are relevant to the charges before me.

“And‚ on the face of the substantiation affidavit‚ it would appear to me that what is set out therein is relevant to the charges before me. I say this without making any comment on the correctness of the facts set out therein‚” Bham said.

On the two processes‚ Bham indicated that it did not fall within his legal powers to suspend either of them.