Busi is use­less, says Cyril’s DG


The Citizen (KZN) - - Front Page - Ber­nade e Wicks – [email protected]­i­zen.co.za

‘Ir­ra­tional and not com­pe­tent’ is how the Pres­i­dency’s Cas­sius Lu­bisi de­scribes Pub­lic Protector Bu­sisiwe Mkhwe­bane.

Bid to have re­me­dial ac­tion or­dered on horserac­ing in­dus­try re­viewed and set aside.

‘Ir­ra­tional, un­con­sti­tu­tional, not com­pe­tent and un­law­ful” is how di­rec­tor-gen­eral in the Pres­i­dency Cas­sius Lu­bisi has de­scribed re­me­dial ac­tion or­dered by Pub­lic Protector Bu­sisiwe Mkhwe­bane, in yet an­other ju­di­cial chal­lenge of one of her re­ports.

Pres­i­dent Cyril Ramaphosa last month launched an ap­pli­ca­tion in the High Court in Pre­to­ria to have the re­me­dial ac­tion Mkhwe­bane or­dered in her May 2019 re­port on the horserac­ing in­dus­try re­viewed and set aside.

His ap­pli­ca­tion to have her re­port into his CR17 cam­paign for the ANC pres­i­dency re­viewed and set aside is still pend­ing be­fore the same court.

In the lat­est ac­tion, Lu­bisi, in an af­fi­davit con­firmed by Ramaphosa, ac­cused Mkhwe­bane of fail­ing to “ex­er­cise her pow­ers in a man­ner that is con­sti­tu­tion­ally sound” by try­ing to or­der the pres­i­dent to con­sti­tute a min­is­te­rial com­mit­tee to es­tab­lish a reg­u­la­tor for thor­ough­bred horserac­ing.

The pub­lic protector in May re­leased a re­port ti­tled “Al­le­ga­tions of mal­ad­min­is­tra­tion and im­proper con­duct in con­nec­tion with a mem­o­ran­dum of un­der­stand­ing en­tered into be­tween the Gaut­eng Pro­vin­cial Govern­ment and the Gaut­eng horserac­ing in­dus­try in 1997 which sub­se­quently led to the cor­po­rati­sa­tion of the horserac­ing in­dus­try”.

In her re­port, she found monies from the Horserac­ing De­vel­op­ment Fund that were in­tended to be used for the ben­e­fit of grooms work­ing in the sec­tor, had not been used and that this con­sti­tuted mal­ad­min­is­tra­tion.

“The pub­lic protector has the power to re­port on, and to di­rect re­me­dial ac­tion, only in re­spect of con­duct in state af­fairs which the pub­lic protector finds to be im­proper or to re­sult in any im­pro­pri­ety or prej­u­dice,” said Lu­bisi.

“Hav­ing found that pub­lic funds al­lo­cated from the Horserac­ing De­vel­op­ment Fund dur­ing the cor­po­rati­sa­tion process for the ben­e­fit of grooms and for the up­grad­ing of sta­bling fa­cil­i­ties were not used for their in­tended pur­pose, the pub­lic protector is ac­cord­ingly con­strained to di­rect re­me­dial ac­tion that is in­tended to rem­edy the im­proper con­duct that she found and no more.”

He said the re­me­dial ac­tion Mkhwe­bane had di­rected in this case “bears no re­la­tion to the im­proper con­duct that the pub­lic protector has found to be sub­stan­ti­ated”.

Lu­bisi ac­cused Mkhwe­bane of hav­ing ex­ceeded her pow­ers and “un­law­fully ar­ro­gated to her­self the ex­ec­u­tive author­ity to se­lect how best to dis­charge the func­tions of the Cabi­net”.

“The es­tab­lish­ment of a statu­tory, reg­u­la­tory body as di­rected by the pub­lic protector en­tails the in­tro­duc­tion and pass­ing of a Bill to that end,” he said. “It is a fun­da­men­tal prin­ci­ple of con­sti­tu­tional law that the leg­isla­tive dis­cre­tion vested in par­lia­ment can­not be fet­tered in ad­vance of its ex­er­cises.”

Re­me­dial ac­tion bears no re­la­tion to the im­proper con­duct

Pic­ture: Jac­ques Nelles

UN­DER AT­TACK. Pub­lic Protector Bu­sisiwe Mkhwe­bane is ac­cused of ex­ceed­ing her pow­ers.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.