PRAVIN BLASTS BLF COURT BID
Minister wants party to pay all costs
FINANCE Minister Pravin Gordhan has in court papers described an application against him by Black Land First (BLF) as scandalous, vexatious, irrelevant and an attempt to “attain political ends through litigation”.
BLF lodged papers in the high court in October last year, in which it seeks to force Gordhan to comply with the recommendations contained in a report by a British spy, the Ciex Report, on a lifeboat given to Bankcorp by the SA Reserve Bank in 1985. BLF leader Andile Mngxitama also wants the court to declare a conflict of interest between Gordhan and his alleged role as a shareholder in the country’s banks. He also wants Gordhan to answer for the billions of rands highlighted in the Ciex report and to recover some R26-billion from “white capital” who he alleges had a role in removing then MP Des van Rooyen from Treasury and having Gordhan reappointed to the post of finance minister.
The application by Mngxitama contains a number of allegations levelled against Gordhan by those aligned to the politically connected Gupta family. It also questions Gordhan for lodging an application for an order declaring that he cannot lawfully intervene in the closure of the bank accounts of the Gupta family company, Oakbay.
Gordhan dislodges the allegations one by one, arguing in the main that Mnxgitama’s allegations are spurious, devoid of fact and are not backed up by law. He further asks that the respondent be ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale – meaning he would have to bear costs which are much higher than costs usually awarded when litigation fails. He has also asked that Mnxgitama himself be liable for the costs.
“The multiple serious and manifest defects in the application, its self-evident lack of merit, its attempt to attain political ends through litigation and the scandalous, vexatious and irrelevant allegations … justify a special costs order,” Gordhan said.
He said Mnxgitama’s application was a violation of his right to access the courts, and his allegation that Gordhan was conflicted was factually unfounded. On the Ciex report, Gordhan said the matter was under investigation by the public protector, and the application violated the doctrine of the separation of powers as parliament held the responsibility of oversight over the executive.