Thuli v Zuma (the sequel)

Public protector and president lock horns in court over explosive ’state capture’ probe

Dear President Zuma

IREFER to your letter dated October 10 2016. My failure to respond to each allegation contained therein should not be construed as an admission thereof. I reserve my rights to deal with these allegations at the appropriate time and place.

At the outset I wish to reassure you that this office has, to date: not concluded its investigations into this matter; and made no adverse finding against you.

I undertake that this office will comply with its duties under the constitution, the Public Protector Act, Executive Members’ Ethics Act and all other relevant laws in conducting this investigation and submitting the report.

At the outset of this investigation, I exercised my discretion to expedite proceedings, given that I:

Am empowered by the constitution to conduct an independent and impartial investigation, without fear, favour or prejudice;

Am empowered by the Public Protector Act to afford persons implicated in the investigation an opportunity to respond in an expedited manner;

Was required to submit a report on the alleged breach of the code of ethics within 30 days of receipt of the complaint; and

Reported to you at the end of the period referred to above that the investigation had not yet been completed.

This office is nevertheless required to submit another report when the investigation has been completed; and the subject of our investigation is a matter of both national importance and considerable public interest, concerning, as it does, serious allegations of impropriety and legal and ethical violations by you and other state functionaries.

I have, since my first letter to you dated March 22 2016, gone to great lengths to provide you with sufficient detail regarding evidence implicating you and the response required from you.

I have, in compliance with the Public Protector Act and the law on administrative justice, provided you with ample opportunity to respond in connection therewith.

The notice in terms of section 7 (9) of the Public Protector Act is merely one in a succession of letters to you canvassing substantially similar issues regarding this matter.

It is of concern to me that you have, on two occasions, undertaken to provide a response to questions put to you in writing; when the time arose, you changed your mind and refused to provide responses.

It is, with respect, incumbent upon you to provide responses within a period that I decided is both convenient and practical to me, given that:

The constitution requires you to assist and protect this office;

The constitution prohibits you from interfering with the functioning of this office; and

The Public Protector Act vests in me the discretion to require you to provide me with an expedited response.

The spirit of the constitution and the Public Protector Act requires you to cooperate fully in the investigation process; conversely, recalcitrant witnesses, particularly high-ranking members of the executive such as you, should be regarded as violating the letter and spirit of the constitution and the Public Protector Act.

I have provided you with the evidence of the witnesses implicating you. You are not entitled to the full record of investigations as a condition precedent to answering the questions I have put to you.

I look forward to receiving the questions you wish to pose to witnesses who have appeared before me. I shall make a determination on such questions in accordance with the Public Protector Act.

You are not entitled to refuse to answer the questions I have put to you prior to questioning other witnesses who have appeared before me. Your right to question witnesses is not a sine qua non for your response to my questions.

I believe that it is in your interest, and that of the people of South Africa, to account fully and honestly regarding the allegations against you. I am affording you a further extension to answer the questions put to you by no later than 11am, Thursday, October 13 2016 to enable this office to conclude the investigation and issue its report on the outcome thereof as soon as possible.

I extend my commitment to meet with you, telephone you or communicate in any other manner, at any time convenient to you, to receive your version of events before 11am, Thursday, October 13 2016. I look forward to hearing from you in the above regard and thank you in anticipation of your cooperation. Best wishes Advocate Thuli Madonsela Comment on this: write to tellus@sundaytimes.co.za or SMS us at 33971 www.sundaytimes.co.za

SAME OLD STORY: How the Sunday Times reported the first major clash between public protector Thuli Madonsela and President Jacob Zuma, in March 2014, when she reminded him that the findings of her office were indeed binding, and not recommendations as...