Op­po­si­tion slams Mkhwe­bane

De­ci­sion on state cap­ture ‘sur­prises’

Weekend Argus (Saturday Edition) - - FRONT PAGE - SIYABONGA MKHWANAZI

OP­PO­SI­TION par­ties have been left shocked by new Pub­lic Pro­tec­tor Bu­sisiwe Mkhwe­bane’s de­ci­sion yes­ter­day not to op­pose the ap­pli­ca­tion by Pres­i­dent Ja­cob Zuma and Co-op­er­a­tive Gov­er­nance Min­is­ter Des van Rooyen to block the re­lease of the state cap­ture re­port.

The op­po­si­tion promised to meet Mkhwe­bane in court on Novem­ber 1, when the ap­pli­ca­tion will be heard. They said this was no longer a mat­ter for her, but that of op­po­si­tion par­ties against Zuma and Van Rooyen be­cause they wanted to in­ter­dict the re­lease of the re­port.

Mkhwe­bane told Par­lia­ment this week she would file her re­spond­ing pa­pers in the North Gaut­eng High Court in Pretoria yes­ter­day. She did not in­di­cate to MPs whether she would op­pose the in­ter­dict.

Yes­ter­day Van Rooyen with­drew his ap­pli­ca­tion in the High Court, ar­gu­ing the pub­lic pro­tec­tor had not made se­ri­ous find­ings against him. This flew in the face of his ur­gent ap­pli­ca­tion last week when he sought to block the re­lease of the re­port.

DA fed­eral ex­ec­u­tive chair­man James Selfe said they were dis­ap­pointed about Mkhwe­bane.

“We are sur­prised and some­what dis­ap­pointed at her re­ac­tion which does not bode well for a Chap­ter 9 in­sti­tu­tion,” he said.

Their ap­pli­ca­tion on Novem­ber 1 would go ahead and the court would have to rule whether it would al­low it as an in­ter­ven­ing party. The DA, Cope, UDM and EFF are in­ter­ven­ing par­ties in the mat­ter.

Selfe said the case next month would no longer be be­tween the pub­lic pro­tec­tor against Zuma and Van Rooyen, but op­po­si­tion par­ties against the pres­i­dent and his min­is­ter.

Cope spokesman Den­nis Bloem said they were shocked and dis­ap­pointed by Mkhwe­bane’s de­ci­sion.

Bloem said they wanted the re­port to be made pub­lic ur­gently. They were start­ing to ques­tion some of Mkhwe­bane’s de­ci­sions, he added.

“It is very clear since this new pub­lic pro­tec­tor has taken over, it seems to us she is busy try­ing to do things in a way to dis­credit Thuli Madon­sela,” he said.

Act­ing EFF spokesman Fana Mokoena de­scribed the de­ci­sion as strange. He said it was also in­ter­est­ing that Van Rooyen had with­drawn his ap­pli­ca­tion.

But the EFF would be in court next month to hear the ap­pli­ca­tion.

ACDP MP Steve Swart said they were equally shocked by this lat­est devel­op­ment.

“It does seem strange be­cause all the par­ties say the re­port must be made pub­lic.”


Pub­lic Pro­tec­tor Bu­sisiwe Mkhwe­bane.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.