Dailymaverick logo

Maverick News

This article is more than a year old

AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY

Mkhwebane suffers another legal blow, with costs, after SCA strikes appeal off the court roll

Serial legal delinquent, former Public Protector and current EFF MP Busisiwe Mkhwebane has failed (again) in an attempt to appeal against a decision on her Section 194 impeachment inquiry.
Marianne Thamm
ThammBusi Former Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane. (Photo: Gallo Images / Brenton Geach)

Represented by Advocate Dali Mpofu, Mkhwebane was dealt another body blow as the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on Tuesday struck off the roll, with costs, her appeal against the Western Cape Division of the High Court’s dismissal of an application to remove the chair of the historic impeachment inquiry.

It is a further setback among Mkhwebane’s ongoing attempts to challenge her impeachment process while simultaneously leveraging the law in other matters, including an attempt to obtain a R10-million gratuity she claims she is due.

The Office of the Public Protector South Africa has challenged this, with Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi arguing on its behalf in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria in August that Mkhwebane was the only Public Protector to be impeached for misconduct and incompetence, and was not in the same position as previous incumbents of the office.

Acquiescing to Mkhwebane’s demand for payment would set “bad precedent” he argued.

‘Constitutional delinquency’

“What you have is a reward for constitutional delinquency. And this, I’m afraid, my Lord, is the big elephant in the room that this case, really what it is about, is asking the judge to be party to a reward for constitutional delinquency,” he told the court.

Ngcukaitobi argued that Mkhwebane did not meet the requirements for a gratuity payment because she had not left office as required by the Public Protector Act, but was removed on grounds of misconduct.

A ruling is yet to be made on the matter.

Read more: Paying Mkhwebane a R10m gratuity would reward ‘constitutional delinquency’, court hears

Mkhwebane currently serves as an EFF MP on the parliamentary committee for justice, which oversees the Office of the Public Protector.

Democratic Alliance spokesperson on Justice, Advocate Glynnis Breytenbach, on Tuesday said the ruling was “a victory for the rule of law and a reaffirmation of the importance of accountability in South Africa’s democratic institutions”.

She said the court’s judgment made it clear that Mkhwebane’s attempts to use the judicial system for personal interests after being lawfully removed from office was without merit.

Said Breytenbach: “We are particularly pleased that the court awarded costs against Ms Mkhwebane in her personal capacity, recognising that this frivolous litigation has wasted valuable resources, clogged the court rolls and wasted our courts’ precious time. It is critical that public officials are held accountable for their actions and that legal processes are not misused to obstruct justice”.

Last week Mkhwebane’s fellow impeachee, former Judge John Hlophe, who now leads the MK party in Parliament, has been interdicted from serving on the Judicial Service Commission.

The body which interviews judges has opted to continue without him, which has resulted in Hlophe, who is part of the Coalition-of-the-Implicated that has coagulated around former president Jacob Zuma, leader of MK, threatening legal action. DM

Comments

Loading your account…
Steve Davidson 2 October 2024 06:32 AM

Oh well, at least Mpoohfoo made some more money...

Graeme 2 October 2024 10:10 AM

Maybe he will give her a bulk discount.

D'Esprit 2 October 2024 01:19 PM

How does he look his clients in the eyes knowing he's going to lose? Or does he honestly think that the windmills he tilts at are foes slain on the battlefield?

louw.nic 2 October 2024 02:27 PM

The idea is not to win, it's to engage in "lawfare" or, locally, "Stalingrad Tactics": "the strategic use of legal proceedings to intimidate or hinder an opponent". The above is usually done with State/corporate resources. THAT is why the costs order against her is going to STING.

D'Esprit 2 October 2024 08:46 PM

I'd really like to see lawyers held to account more: if it's a patently ridiculous claim (as in this case) the lawyer should be jointly liable for costs. It would definitely speed up our court processes!

Kanu 4 October 2024 12:45 AM

Ditto !

Johan Buys 2 October 2024 09:12 PM

Do advocates have a scorecard like boxers? Eg “18 for 21” is 18 wins in 21 bouts. I’d venture Mpofu scorecard is 2 for 217?

Roke Wood 3 October 2024 07:23 AM

no we dont. but what most of us do have is a quantum of self respect. respect of the court. and a duty to the court first (for Advocates) and your client a very close second. I agree to certain extent that generally speaking, if a case is hopeless, then the lawyer has a duty to tell his/her client.

Kanu 4 October 2024 12:56 AM

"Hopeless" ... And give up on a lucrative pay-day ?? You must be joking ! That would reflect the "content of one's character " as ML King would say . 'Character' was never determined by the colour of one's skin. Just look at supreme court justice Clarence Thomas in the US as an example.

Jennifer D 2 October 2024 07:15 AM

That we even entertain these criminals is an indictment on South Africa.

l***9@g***.com 2 October 2024 09:09 AM

Absolutely - they should no part in any leadership role - they are not leaders, they are bullies, that need to be cut to size.

Sydney Kaye 2 October 2024 07:44 AM

There is a pattern here. A certain lawyer pursuedes his narcissistic clients that they are right and everybody else is wrong on the law, does his usual arm waving patronizing performance in court, losers and walks off with his fee

Sydney Kaye 2 October 2024 07:44 AM

There is a pattern here. A certain lawyer pursuedes his narcissistic clients that they are right and everybody else is wrong on the law, does his usual arm waving patronizing performance in court, losers and walks off with his fee

paulzille 2 October 2024 09:18 AM

Right. But who's paying? They obviously have deep pockets because the 'Coalition of the Implicated' have no shame and an insatiable appetite for doomed appeals.

ijwill1966 2 October 2024 12:16 PM

Have you considered, as Breytenbach hints at, that all these frivolous court cases "clogging the rolls" are a deliberate ploy on some individuals' part to lengthen the amount of time it takes to get a case concluded? Every appeal adds to congestion of the entire court system

Richard Bryant 2 October 2024 07:58 AM

I can’t wait to see if Mkhwebane will entertain the EFF farce and pull on red overalls and jack boots.

Indeed Jhb 2 October 2024 11:29 AM

Ha ha intesting point - will probably have a few designer amendments done before. Personally I think red is not her colour - orange would be more pleasing

j***y@f***.co.za 2 October 2024 08:01 AM

Has Mpofu ever won a case?

Grumpy Old Man 2 October 2024 09:47 AM

2 that I can recall! The 2nd on behalf of MK against the ANC relating to its use of the MK name and logo The 1st when he got Kagiso Rabada off a mandatory one match ban against the Australians. The 1st instance was arguably his most impressive public good win

Indeed Jhb 2 October 2024 11:31 AM

Undoubtedly!

Indeed Jhb 2 October 2024 11:31 AM

Undoubtedly!

David van Wyk 2 October 2024 04:32 PM

Indeed.

Rae 2 October 2024 08:47 AM

The usual losing, team hard at work. Mpofu: Does he ever win a case? Mkhwebane: In a race to match Mpofu in failure rates? Mpofu has the advantage. He says "I will take your case and lose but you must pay me a lot of money because I'm so good at losing". He's right and they pay. Strange.

Indeed Jhb 2 October 2024 11:24 AM

Glad that is done. She needs to be removed from the parliamentary committee for justice - unfit for post and huge conflict of interest. Surprised DA has not indicated that yet.

D'Esprit 2 October 2024 11:30 AM

I suppose this is one way for the state to claw back State Capture money. Bit long-winded and inefficient, but it's a start.

Les Thorpe 2 October 2024 11:39 AM

I'm sure her "learned friend", Dali M, will now encourage her to submit ConCourt application. There's even more fees to be had. Don't know which is the biggest scam . . . a Ponzi scheme or Dali M's advice.

Jean Racine 2 October 2024 12:17 PM

“Exasperated sighs, soapbox oratory, empty rhetoric, political posturing, theatrical gestures and long-winded dismissive non sequiturs have no place in a courtroom.” Justice Visvanathan Ponnan on behalf of a unanimous bench on Tuesday.

Ewan 2 October 2024 12:57 PM

What can we say, the man must have a very thick skin as he will be back for another judicial tongue lashing very soon.

Kanu 4 October 2024 01:08 AM

"very thick skin' .. but even thicker 'bank balance' .. from the 'proceeds of crime' ... as someone pointed out. He learnt that trick in his first major pay-day, as 'severed' head of SABC many moons ago.

Robert 2 October 2024 01:55 PM

Should every payment Dali receives not be subject to review by the banks as we all know that the money used by Zuma and his cohorts to pay these costs are the proceeds of crime?

Freda 2 October 2024 03:28 PM

A good point. She must pay own costs, excellent news.

ijwill1966 2 October 2024 02:21 PM

I see on another site that the erstwhile PP has played the race card, blaming her ongoing predicament on a conspiracy by Indian people. Paranoid, much?

D'Esprit 2 October 2024 08:48 PM

Seriously? Which site?

ijwill1966 3 October 2024 08:43 AM

Both IOL and sowetanLive.

theresa burdett 2 October 2024 03:25 PM

Sick and tired of incompetent people clogging up the courts. Tired of ANC making dubious decisions. Just tired of our country which has become a circus and crime ridden society. Not acceptable. Have people no character these days. Parents are seriously losing the plot.

David van Wyk 2 October 2024 04:31 PM

This article had many 'Red-Lorry-Yellow-Lorry' moments that I had to re-read. Well written though.

Roke Wood 3 October 2024 07:16 AM

from SCA judgment - "It must follow that, inasmuch as there is neither an appeal properly before this Court, nor an appellant to prosecute it, the matter falls to be struck from the roll. The regret is that unmeritorious appeals, such as this, impact not just the immediate parties and the Court.."

Gled Shonta 3 October 2024 01:02 PM

Two individuals who have worked relentlessly to turn our justice system into a joke are laughed out of court. Schadenfreude is sweet.

2***6@s***.co.za 8 October 2024 12:37 PM

Hi