Get more Mail & Guardian
Subscribe or Login

Ramaphosa enters the fray in fight between Gordhan and Mkhwebane

 

 

President Cyril Ramaphosa has entered the fray in the battle between Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan and Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane. 

On Monday, he filed urgent court papers against the public protector, asking the court to declare that he had complied with the remedial action she directed in her recent report about the pension pay out of former deputy South African Revenue Service (Sars) commissioner Ivan Pillay.

Ramaphosa’s application comes after correspondence between the two became increasingly tense with Mkhwebane saying Ramaphosa was on the verge of precipitating a “constitutional crisis” and accusing him of conduct that was “ostensibly contemptuous” of her office.

In his court papers, Ramaphosa admonished her for trying to dictate to him and badgering him.

The report at issue concerned the approval by Gordhan, when he was finance minister, of an early pension payout for Pillay, which she had found to be irregular.

In her report, Mkhwebane directed Ramaphosa to take note of her findings and take appropriate disciplinary action against Gordhan. However, Gordhan has taken the case to court on review, prompting the president to await its outcome before taking disciplinary steps.

In his affidavit, Ramaphosa said it was “unfortunate” that he had to bring the case to court — “in circumstances where I believe it is wholly unnecessary” and that the case was brought as a “measure of last resort”.

However, it was necessary to obtain legal certainty on what his obligations are — as the president believed he had complied with Mkhwebane’s report, but she believed he had not.

In the context of “the political climate” the case “will unfortunately feed into the unfounded narrative that the State (and its institutions) is at war with itself,” Ramaphosa said.

“It is a constitutionally unpalatable state of affairs to have the Public Protector, the Minister (and now, the President) being embroiled in litigation against each other.” However this case was “not a political matter, but solely a legal one,” he explained.

Ramaphosa said he believed he had complied with Mkhwebanes’s order because he had indeed taken note of the findings in this report — as directed. And, since the nature and the timing of the disciplinary action was left to his discretion, the appropriate course was to await the outcome of the court case brought by Gordhan. He informed her of all of this in the implementation plan — as she had directed him to provide, he said.

“I accept the binding nature of the Public Protector’s reports and remedial actions. I accept that the Report is under review but that this does not stay the implementation of the remedial action, in the absence of a court order,” he said.

In her correspondence, Mkhwebane said she deduced from his letter that he had decided not to implement her remedial action, that this was a “foregone conclusion as [wa]s merely based on [the Minister’s] assertions”.

In a later letter, the public protector said that Ramaphosa was willfully not complying with her remedial action, had acted in a way that was “ostensibly contemptuous” of her office and was breaching his constitutional duties.

Mkhwebane implored the president to take “better legal advice” to avert a constitutional crisis and “take the country many steps backward (i.e. to the pre-Nkandla judgment days)”. If he did not comply it would set a bad precedent, she added.

She demanded implementation “as a matter of urgency and preferably by no later than Friday 12 July 2019”.

In his affidavit, Ramaposa said this time limit was “contrary to the express terms of the remedial action. This constitutes an impermissible attempt to revise the report”.

He then instructed to the state attorney to send her a letter.

Ramaphosa said his disciplinary action, which could take any number of forms, had to be rational — and what was appropriate would depend on what the review court found.

“With complete deference to the Public Protector …. The president ought not to be dictated to or badgered, on matters that lie within the exclusive heart and preserve of executive power”.

Vote for an informed choice

We’re dropping the paywall this week so that everyone can access all our stories for free, and get the information they need in the run up to the local government elections. For the latest updates and political analysis, sign up to our daily elections newsletter.

If our coverage helps inform your decision, cast your vote for an informed public and join our subscriber community. Right now, a full year’s access is just R510, half the usual cost. Subscribers get access to all our best journalism, subscriber-only newsletters, events and a weekly cryptic crossword.

Franny Rabkin
Franny Rabkin
Franny is the legal reporter at the Mail & Guardian

Related stories

WELCOME TO YOUR M&G

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Advertising

Latest stories

Eskom to take ‘extraordinary measures’ to avoid load-shedding for elections

Stage four load-shedding rolled out to ensure the polls on Monday 1 November are energy secure

Khaya Koko: John Steenhuisen, please take a knee

The Democratic Alliance leader rebuking cricketer Quinton de Kock would be this election season’s greatest triumph

Paddy Harper: Will the Covid-19 cigarette ban come back to...

Flashbacks of nicotine deprivation and not poor service delivery may see a run on the polls on Monday

Eskom resorts to stage four load-shedding

Stage-four outages will continue until Friday after the loss of two units during the night, and three in total at Medupi, Kusile and Matla power plants tripping
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…
×