The African National Congress (ANC) on Friday lodged a formal complaint with the Public Protector against acting prosecutions head Mokotedi Mpshe, the protector’s office said.
ANC treasurer general Mathews Phosa lodged the complaint with protector Lawrence Mushwana, alleging unlawful conduct by Mpshe, the protector’s office said.
The Public Protector’s office investigates maladministration, delays in service delivery and allegations of impropriety or prejudice in government.
On Thursday, Phosa released a letter of complaint that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and Mpshe had subjected ANC president Jacob Zuma to ”the torture of public condemnation and loss of reputation”.
”We therefore request that the Public Protector investigate and make findings that the NPA’s discriminatory selection of Zuma for prosecution, repeated violation of his fair trial rights … have been unlawful, invidious or in bad faith,” Phosa wrote.
Phosa said remarks made by Mpshe in an interview with City Press ”reflected a pattern of prosecutorial misconduct”.
He felt that Mpshe’s remarks showed that he disregarded court rulings.
Mpshe is acting in the position until there is finality on the fate of the suspended head of the NPA, Vusi Pikoli.
The NPA said it was trying to clarify some of the statements made in the interview on his year in office.
Sharp criticism
Mpshe’s statements during an interview with City Press drew sharp criticism from ANC general secretary Gwede Mantashe, who claimed the NPA ”has cast aside all pretence of professionalism or political neutrality”.
”It has come out in the open and has effectively admitted that it is pursuing a political vendetta against [ANC] president [Jacob] Zuma,” Mantashe said.
In a statement on Wednesday, the NPA said Mpshe’s interview was a reflection of his first year since he took over following the suspension of Pikoli.
During this interview he recounted some of the key and sometimes difficult matters he had had to deal within this role.
The broader context of Mpshe’s statements was in the spirit of the NPA’s celebration of its 10th anniversary, where he highlighted the successes and challenges the institution had faced during its first decade of existence.
”Some excerpts of that interview have been selectively quoted in the media, a situation which has opened the statements to various interpretations that were not inherent in the message being conveyed,” the NPA said.
”He referred to the climate within which the NPA operated as rough. He stated that a rough climate existed as NPA decisions were subjected to severe public scrutiny and criticism.
”One form of such criticism was a perception that Mr Jacob Zuma’s case was a political trial and that made it difficult for the NPA to handle.
”In any event, this is one of the issues that the Supreme Court of Appeal [SCA] next week may have to adjudicate on,” the NPA said.
Mpshe had also expressed an opinion on the ”incorrectness” of Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Chris Nicholson’s judgement in Zuma’s case.
It was a matter of public record that the NPA successfully applied for leave to appeal against this judgement, based on its conviction that it was legally flawed.
Appealing a case because one believed it was incorrect, and providing the basis for one’s contestation was within the framework of the law and this was a right afforded all citizens, including the NPA.
Once the highest court had pronounced on the matter, the NPA and the public would have to abide by that decision, irrespective of the outcome. ”That is the rule of law, and the NPA fully respects it,” the NPA said.
Media celebrity status
Mpshe was asked in the City Press interview how he would deal with the political implications of recharging Zuma.
In the first part of his response, Mpshe said: ”If you ask me that question 14 years from now I’ll still say Nicholson was wrong. Completely wrong. I don’t foresee a stage where I’m going to change my position on this one. He’s wrong and that’s what I told him. Having said that, the NPA can’t operate as an island and ignore what’s happening around us.”
Mantashe said Mpshe’s statement was ”ample evidence that he and the NPA had very little regard for the rule of law and for the ruling of our judiciary”.
”Mpshe has committed a grave violation of his professional and legal duty as a prosecutor by allowing his judgement on the Zuma matter to be swayed by extraneous political considerations.
”He has admitted that much in his interview with City Press.”
Mantashe said Mpshe’s statement that he would hold Judge Nicholson wrong even 14 years from now ”means he would insist on holding that position regardless of the outcome of the appeal the NPA is currently pursuing.
”A more serious contempt of court and rule of law can scarcely be imagined!”
Mantashe said Mpshe had conducted himself in pursuit of ”media celebrity status”.
Mpshe had done this ”in flagrant disregard for the code of ethics prohibiting prosecutors from making public statements or issuing press releases that have a substantial likelihood of prejudicing a defendant’s right to a fair trial”.
Mantashe said when it came to the Zuma case, Mpshe’s comments were ”aimed at influencing and affecting the outcome of the forthcoming general elections in our country”. — Sapa