Erasmus commission chairperson Judge Nathan Erasmus on Monday dismissed an application by the City of Cape Town for the commission’s suspension.
The commission will begin hearing evidence from witnesses on the City of Cape Town’s so-called ”spy saga” on Tuesday.
Following hours of argument by legal representatives of various parties, Erasmus eventually dismissed an application by the city for the commission to suspend its business pending the main application in the Cape High Court challenging the commission’s legality.
Giving his ruling, Erasmus said the commission did not have the authority to suspend its activities.
Council speaker Dirk Smit launched the high court challenge to the legality of the Erasmus Commission last week.
Smit said at the time the city was arguing that by acting outside the Municipal Systems Act, Rasool was trying to dodge legal constraints on what the province could and could not do when intervening in local government.
”This is an unlawful abuse of his office,” he said.
The high court application has been postponed, apparently until three judges from outside the Western Cape can be brought in to hear the application.
The commission was set up by Rasool last year to probe the city’s own investigation of councillor Badih Chaaban.
Rasool has since added a probe of Chaaban himself, and of the Democratic Alliance-controlled George town council to its brief.
The city’s papers filed last Tuesday in the Cape High Court challenged the legality of the commission both before and after the additions.
During Monday’s application for the commission’s suspension pending the main application, the counsel for Smit and mayor Helen Zille, Craig Webster, argued there was no urgency for the commission to complete its task by June 30, when it was scheduled to submit its report.
The deadline could easily be extended, he said.
The commission should also consider the prejudice that would follow if it continued its work and the main application in the high court succeeded.
Rasool’s counsel, Jan Heunis, argued there was no merit in the city’s application. He rejected the contention that Rasool had exceeded his authority by interfering in local government. He had the constitutional right to appoint commissions of inquiry, counsel said.
The commission also did not have the authority to decide on the application.
Rasool’s proclamation of the commission was valid until a court of law ruled otherwise, and the commission should continue its work in the interim, he said.
Further argument by counsel for various other parties involved when witnesses should be called and related to the availability of legal representatives.
Erasmus then adjourned proceedings for the arguments and applications to be considered by the commission.
Returning to the court room after about an hour, he ruled that the application for the commission’s suspension pending the high court application be dismissed.
He also rejected a separate application for the commission to postpone its work.
Regarding a third application to postpone the commission’s hearings, Erasmus ruled that the evidence of certain witnesses could be led, even in the absence of senior counsel for some of the parties.
A spokesperson for Rasool said afterwards the premier would oppose any urgent interdict brought in the high court to suspend the commission’s work.
In a statement later, Rasool said he was pleased Erasmus had ruled the commission would resume its hearings on Tuesday.
Zille had to realise that ”there must be a point at which the truth must come out and I appeal to her not to be obstructive any longer”.
”The mayor can’t any longer hide behind the fig leaf of the Constitution or the cost of the commission,” Rasool said. — Sapa