[ad_1]
Public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane. (Jan Gerber / News24).
- Judgment has been reserved in the request for authorization to appeal from the Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane.
- He wants to appeal the dismissal of his application by the Western Cape Superior Court to prevent the National Assembly from initiating deportation proceedings against him.
- The president of the National Assembly, Thandi Modise, is ready to continue the process.
A sentence has been reserved in the request for authorization from the public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane to appeal the decision of the Western Cape High Court that rejected his attempt to stop the expulsion process from the National Assembly against him.
The court battle began in February, after Mkhwebane submitted an urgent request for an injunction to stop the process to remove her from office.
The process was initially set in motion by the approval of the DA motion by the president of the National Assembly Thandi Modise. This, after the National Assembly approved the rules for said process, also called impeachment, in December 2019.
Last month, Judge Vincent Saldanha ruled, with the agreement of Judges Monde Samela and Elize Steyn, that there would be “serious damage to the public interest, added to the separation of powers that would harm the National Assembly if the process is not carried out. cape”.
Saldanha said the relief Mkhwebane was seeking would not only affect his position, it would prevent the National Assembly from holding other heads of Chapter 9 institutions accountable.
“The applicant (Mkhwebane), in my opinion, did not meet any of the requirements for provisional relief,” the Saldanha ruling reads.
On Tuesday, Saldanha, Steyn and Samela heard the arguments in the request for permission to appeal.
“The number of errors permeating the judgment in question is innumerable,” Mkhwebane’s lawyer, lawyer Dali Mpofu SC, stated in his arguments.
It is hardly debatable that the decision of this court has immediate, substantial, permanent and irreparable damage to one of the most important offices established for the protection of democracy.
Modise attorney Andrew Breitenbach, SC, said “there was no prospect that the Supreme Court of Appeals would hold that this court is wrong.”
“My wise friend had to present a convincing case to the court,” Breitenbach said. “This case was far from convincing.”
District Attorney Steven Budlender, SC, described Mpofu’s arguments as “threadbare” and said he did not meet any of the requirements for interim measures.
The rules for removing a head from Chapter 9 allowed the president to suspend the head while the removal procedures were carried out.
Advocate Karrisha Pillay, SC, for President Cyril Ramaphosa, said that even if the court granted permission to appeal, it would have no effect, as Ramaphosa would not suspend it while the court process was ongoing.
Mpofu said they wanted to be protected by a court order. “Now we need to be protected by a voluntary commitment that can be withdrawn at any time.”
During Mpofu’s response arguments, Saldanha said: “You really must read the sentence and not misrepresent the sentence.”
Last week at the National Assembly Programming Committee meeting, National Assembly Secretary Masibulele Xaso said Modise was ready to announce the panel that would decide whether there was a prima facie case for Mkhwebane’s impeachment.
“Everything that had to be done was done,” he said, adding that an announcement is expected this week.
Mkhwebane’s application for an injunction against deportation proceedings was only Part A of his application. In Part B, he asks the court to declare unconstitutional and invalid the National Assembly rules for the removal of a head from Chapter 9. This was expected to be heard early next year.
