Busi blinks first in Cele staredown
Protector denies she was in wrong
Public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane suggested yesterday that she and police minister Bheki Cele had resolved the issue about him not giving protection to whistle-blowers outside court.
This despite the high court on Wednesday setting aside her scathing August 2018 report against Cele in which she had lambasted him‚ saying there was “undue delay‚ improper conduct‚ gross negligence and maladministration” by Cele and the police ministry in providing protection to Thabiso Zulu and Lesley Stuta‚ who were witnesses in her investigation into alleged multimillion-rand corruption in the uMzimkhulu local municipality.
“Public protector advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane and minister of police Bheki Cele on Wednesday‚ June 3 2020‚ obtained an order by consent in the Gauteng division of the high court in Pretoria in respect of a matter concerning minister Cele’s challenge of adverse findings and remedial action made and taken against him by advocate Mkhwebane‚” Mkhwebane’s office said in a statement.
“The order means the public protector and the minister reached a voluntary agreement to settle the matter without the public protector conceding the merits of the minister’s application.”
Wednesday’s court ruling‚ which invalidated Mkhwebane’s report‚ came after another ruling delivered in the same court in March that ordered the department of justice to be the one to offer Zulu witness protection‚ and not the police, as suggested by Mkhwebane’s report.
On this matter‚ Mkhwebane stressed, however, that she was not in the wrong and neither did the court find her to be.
“It is important to stress the point that the court‚ in both the separate cases brought by the minister and Mr Zulu‚ did not traverse the merits of the public protector’s case. Accordingly‚ the public protector still holds the strong view that the constitutional duty to provide safety and security to citizens rests with the SAPS‚” her office said.
Mkhwebane‚ however‚ did not take kindly to Cele’s statement issued earlier in which he said he had been “vindicated by the court”.
“It has always been clear that while protection of witnesses is paramount‚ it remains the sole responsibility of the National Prosecution Authority as stated in the Witness Protection Act. The public protector should have known this‚” Cele said.
Mkhwebane said the “snide remarks” were uncalled for.
Of the two witnesses‚ Zulu was the one who had taken the matter of protection to court.
“The March 26 order in the same division ordered that Mr Zulu must [be] afforded temporary witness protection... while awaiting an application for protection from Mr Zulu‚” justice ministry spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said yesterday.
“Zulu [has since] requested to be voluntarily discharged as the programme does not provide the kind of service he needs‚ according to him,” Phiri added.