Cyril hits back at Moyane

President Cyril Ramaphosa’s lawyers have accused suspended tax boss Tom Moyane of “effectively sabotaging” the speedy conclusion of the misconduct inquiry against him by using “technical points” as a basis to not answer to the charges against him.

Moyane‚ in turn‚ argues that the inquiry is being conducted in an “unlawful‚ unfair‚ unconstitutional and manifestly oppressive” way “in that it automatically excludes oral evidence”. He maintains he can only answer to the case against him when these objections are resolved.

That’s not how Ramaphosa’s lawyers see it.

“If‚ as Mr Moyane has stated repeatedly in correspondence through his attorney‚ he seeks to clear his name as a matter of urgency‚ one would have expected him to have answered to the substance of the allegations contained in the affidavit‚” Ramaphosa’s lawyers said in heads of argument submitted prior to the first hearing of Moyane’s misconduct inquiry tomorrow.

“Instead‚ Mr Moyane seeks to turn sound disciplinary procedure on its head by refusing to answer to the substance of the allegations against him until his technical points have been determined. In so doing‚ Mr Moyane is effectively sabotaging the speedy conclusion of his disciplinary inquiry.”

Lawyers for the Presidency also sought to challenge Moyane’s argument that there is no real case against him‚ and revealed the names of five other witnesses who will provide evidence to his misconduct inquiry. These include Helgaard Lombard‚ the SARS employee Moyane is accused of instructing “to feign illness to avoid attending an interview scheduled with KPMG pursuant to its investigation into the SARS high risk investigative unit”.

Moyane is also facing charges in relation to his alleged failure to take action against his former second-incommand Jonas Makwakwa.

Ramaphosa’s lawyers have accused Moyane of trying to set the terms for his own disciplinary inquiry.

Moyane has made it clear he wanted Ramaphosa to testify against him‚ and did not want the case decided on documentary evidence.

He has also objected that the case against him has been made by Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan. He says Gordhan was not authorised to give this evidence.

Moyane has again argued‚ as he did before Judge Robert Nugent‚ that the Nugent inquiry into tax governance is‚ essentially‚ an inquiry into him. He insists that this is deeply unfair and nonsensical.