Mot­shekga de­nies bias in de­bate on pro­tec­tor

The New Age (Gauteng) - - POLITICS - DEN­NIS CRUYWAGEN news@the­newage.co.za

THE chair­per­son of Par­lia­ment’s jus­tice and cor­rec­tional ser­vices port­fo­lio com­mit­tee, Mathole Mot­shekga, and the over­sight body, have acted to set the record straight about his par­tic­i­pa­tion in a de­bate con­cern­ing public pro­tec­tor Bu­sisiwe Mhk­we­bane.

In a state­ment, they said Mot­shekga “at no stage sided with cer­tain mem­bers of the com­mit­tee” dur­ing a meet­ing to de­cide on the re­fer­ral by the speaker that the body con­sider an in­quiry into Mhk­we­bane’s fit­ness to be in of­fice.

Ac­cord­ing to the state­ment, at the start of Tues­day’s meet­ing, Mot­shekga em­pha­sised he had pro­posed to the port­fo­lio com­mit­tee how the mat­ter should be dealt with.

He said the work of the com­mit­tee was pos­si­bly con­flicted be­cause the public pro­tec­tor re­port had rec­om­mended “re­me­dial ac­tion” – that of the chair­per­son amending the Con­sti­tu­tion to limit the pow­ers of the South African Re­serve Bank.

It was pro­posed that the mat­ter be re­ferred back to the speaker for an ad hoc com­mit­tee to at­tend to the mat­ter, the state­ment said.

Fur­ther­more, Mot­shekga said be­cause an ad hoc com­mit­tee rec­om­mended the ap­point­ment of the public pro­tec­tor “it should be” the ad hoc com­mit­tee that con­sid­ered the re­moval of the public pro­tec­tor.

“At no stage did I, as the com­mit­tee chair­per­son, par­tic­i­pate in the vote or side with par­ties. I merely high­lighted the com­mit­tee’s work­load and the pos­si­ble fo­rum to deal with the mat­ter.

“Me­dia re­ports stat­ing oth­er­wise are in­cor­rect. I acted im­par­tially as a chair­per­son,” the state­ment said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.