So Many Questions

The nomination of Robert McBride as head of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate, the police oversight body, has sparked an outcry. Chris Barron asked the chairwoman of the parliamentary portfolio committee on police, Annelize van Wyk . . .

Will your committee interrogate this decision?

Our next meeting is January 28 and I have sent out an invitation to the minister to come and to motivate for the nomination.

What are your main points of concern?

Who says I’ve got concerns?

Do you?

For me it is about do we get somebody who is independent thinking . . .

In this regard, is it desirable to have a loyal ANC cadre in the position?

Nobody asked this question when Francois Beukman [ANC MP and previous executive director] was appointed . . .

Do you know why he walked out of the job?

No, but I know some people are making certain allegations.

That he was instructed to whitewash the police role in the Marikana massacre?

Yes. And I am very concerned that they should be tested. But why now is the fact that McBride is an ANC member suddenly an issue? For me it borders on racism. If it’s a white ANC member it’s okay, if it’s a non-white ANC member, it’s not okay.

What about his record as metro police chief?

What is this record that we’re speaking about?

He was fired, wasn’t he?

That might be so. I’m not privy to the information and the discussions around his leaving the department.

Are you aware of the stories that came up in court?

Yes, but what was the end result? That he was found not guilty.

False statements, assaulting witnesses, covering up crimes — surely disturbing allegations to be linked to someone in charge of the police watchdog?

But there was also a finding in the court that those witnesses were considered to be liars. Why are we ignoring that part of it?

Surely it’s about reputation?

What is the reputation built on? Two cases where the person was found to be not guilty.

Is the fact that he was fired as metro police chief not a matter of concern?

Those are the things that must be asked of the minister when we have him in front of the committee — whether they considered that [and] why it happened.

And the fact that he was convicted of drunk driving and defeating the ends of justice?

And appealed and found not guilty.

Doesn’t integrity matter?

Of course. But if you appear in a court of law and you’re found not guilty but now you’ve got a reputation . . .

Isn’t there something about the number and nature of the allegations? That he’s found himself on the wrong side of the law so often?

As far as I know, twice. And he was found not guilty. If we’re going to respect the courts, then we’ve got to respect those findings as well.

Is it problematic that he has no legal qualification?

No, it’s not, because it is not a requirement.

Why did the initial job advert for his post stipulate that applicants needed a legal qualification?

I do not draft the applications for those job advertisements. The minister’s office will have to answer that.

Will you ask the minister why this requirement was removed?

Of course we will ask that question. But I find it interesting that the legislative arm, of which the opposition parties are part, when they did the act in 2011 they did not put a legal requirement in as one of the requirements for the head of the directorate.

The fact is that there was a legal requirement in the job advert . . .

I can’t speak on behalf of the advert, but I can speak about the fact that the lawmakers, which included the opposition parties, did not put in a legal qualification as a requirement. And, quite honestly, I don’t believe there should be such a requirement.

How can he guide investigators on legal matters without a legal qualification?

The directorate has a legal section that gives legal guidance in terms of investigations. The executive director will work on the advice of that legal section.

His responsibilities include financial and staff management, etcetera. Does his record in terms of these things inspire confidence?

The appeal judge’s finding was that the people who made the allegations that have contributed to this record were liars.

Why do so many people tell so many lies about McBride, do you think?

I’m not a sangoma.

Shouldn’t the person in charge of the police watchdog be above suspicion?

Based on what do you measure that?

His reputation?

That’s where we differ. I differ in terms of the testing of the reputation through a court of law.