The EFF indicated they would take Adv. Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s ousting on judicial review. [Picture: Business Day]
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have indicated they might take Parliament’s ousting of the former Public Protector on judicial review. After a lengthy process, the House voted overwhelmingly in favour of removing Adv. Busisiwe Mkhwebane on Monday.
A majority of 318 MPs voted to adopt a report by the Section 194 committee into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office. A mere 43 voted against and one abstained. The EFF, African Transformation Movement (ATM) and United Democratic Movement (UDM) were against impeachment.
“Parliament can’t be reduced to a tool for punishing individuals who seek to disagree with the powerful. We therefore reject the report and we reject the political witch-hunt initiated by the DA and supported by the ANC alliance to punish Adv Mkhwebane in order to protect Mr [Cyril[ Ramaphosa,” said Omphile Maotwe, MP, ahead of the vote.
“We reiterate our stance as the EFF that we reserve our right to take this report and the illegal adoption of the report by this Parliament on judicial review.”
SMread: Morocco shattered by worst quake in over a century
‘Predetermined’
Mkhwebane had herself repeatedly claimed the outcome of the vote had been predetermined. She repeated the allegation in an interview on Salaamedia and now Maotwe and the EFF said the same.
“We can never claim that the conduct of the chair was reasonable or fair in the manner he has handled this issue. The findings in the report, that the PP demonstrated incompetence in relation to the charges against what she faced, were therefore pre-determined,” said Maotwe.
However, those in favour of Mkhwebane’s ousting disagreed. Responding to the allegation by the EFF and others in the National Assembly, the Freedom Front Plus’ (FF+) Dr Cornelius Mulder said the Section 194 inquiry was “the most comprehensive, most thorough and most fair investigation process of Parliament since 1994”.
“Unlike the ordinary people, the Public Protector had the benefit of legal representation of her choice and was assisted by four legal practitioners from the beginning of proceedings at the cost of at least R36 million of the peoples’ money. No one in South Africa, since 1994, was assisted in that way,” he said.
“It’s simply not true. There was a previous Public Protector who made very bad findings against a former executive and that Public Protector was not removed. Why? Because she was not incompetent,” he added, referring to Thuli Madonsela and her findings against Jacob Zuma.
