[ad_1]
- The inquiry into Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s fitness for office was put on
hold after a witness received an ostensibly threatening text message. - The witness, Rodney Mataboge, refused to continue his testimony.
- The committee said it would subpoena Mataboge to appear on Thursday
and Friday.
The Section 194 Committee inquiring into Public Protector Busisiwe
Mkhwebane’s fitness for office lost another day of testimony on Wednesday when
a witness refused to testify after he received an intimidating text message.
Public Protector chief investigator Rodney Mataboge started his
testimony on Tuesday.
After being sworn in, he expressed concern about publicly testifying.
He said, as an investigator, he felt vulnerable about appearing before
the committee.
“We’ve got a problem with whistle blowers that needs protection in
our society,” Mataboge added.
“Am I being exposed now to the outside world?”
After
his testimony, he received a text message, and this was brought to the
committee’s attention on Tuesday evening.
The full message reads:
Mr Rodney Mataboge i have been waiting patiently to listen to your testimony of section 194 in parliament.
I am Mokgele Mojaki. You were hellbent on producing an adverse report on me in Ngaka Modiri Molema.
You failed to sustain your shenanigans in court, you are not an honest person.
I hope you are exposed. No wonder you have been called as a witness by the very person you have been misleading.
You deliberately tried to frustrate me but at the end [I] was vindicated.
You will never practice outside that office because you are not worth to be an advocate.
Now you are live, the whole country is watching you.
Karma is a bitch.
I have been patiently [waiting] to see you exposing yourself.
You are good in hiding evidence rule 53 records of all the cases lost by the public protectors office where you were involved.
You should hang your head in shame.
Mataboge was scheduled to continue his testimony on Wednesday
morning.
At the start of Wednesday’s meeting, the committee’s legal advisor,
Fatima Ebrahim, advised the committee to attend to a matter which arose
overnight, behind closed doors.
It meant involving only committee members and support staff, excluding
the evidence leaders, Mkhwebane and her team, and the media and public.
READ | Mpofu questions relevance of
evidence seemingly absolving Mkhwebane of Gordhan witchhunt
More than two hours later, the meeting was opened again.
“It has taken longer than I thought it would,” said the
chairperson of the committee, Qubudile Dyantyi.
He added it became apparent the committee had to apply its collective
mind.
Dyantyi said Mataboge shared with Ebrahim a text message from an
“ordinary South African”.
The message was shown publicly at the committee meeting.
Dyantyi
added:
We felt that the work of this committee was being impeded by the sending of such a message to a witness that is here in this committee yesterday [Tuesday].
He noted Mataboge raised the protection of witnesses ahead of his
testimony on Tuesday.
“We are of the firm view that it can’t be allowed and just be
allowed to proceed where a witness who is here gets a text message from
whoever, to a point where our work would then be impeded.”
Dyantyi said the committee had the “firm view” everybody
needed to know who this person was.
The committee decided to contact Mojaki to ask that he put his
complaints in writing and desist from interacting with the witness.
It also sought Mataboge’s view, while they met in camera, and they were
of the view that its witnesses must be protected.
Dyantyi
added:
We have to be consistent to ensure that this process is fair and rational.
He said several witnesses, who appeared before the committee,
“endured this risk” and the committee had received submissions
“either whilst a witness was on the stand or after, where people were
writing to us to say this witness is mentioning my name, or this witness is not
saying the correct things”.
Dyantyi added Mataboge’s testimony did not meet the criteria for an in-camera
hearing in terms of Parliament’s rules.
He said the message had nothing to do with what Mataboge testified about
on Tuesday.
“It is a text that relates to previous work. It looks to us there
is an inherent risk in the job that they are doing as investigators at the
[Public Protector South Africa].”
Dyantyi added the committee would ask the Office of the Public Protector
to “do what it must do to protect Mr Mataboge”.
Mataboge indicated he would seek legal advice about being subpoenaed by
the committee because he intended not to proceed with his testimony.
Dyantyi
said:
We don’t have an option, as a committee, not to conclude his testimony. As a result, we have decided, therefore, that we are going to subpoena Mr Mataboge.
He would be subpoenaed to appear on Thursday and Friday, as scheduled.
Ebrahim indicated National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula had
already consented to issue the subpoena.
In 2017, the Public Protector issued a report with adverse findings
against Mojaki, who was, at the time, the municipal manager for the Ngaka
Modiri Molema Municipality in the North West.
“The report follows an investigation into the alleged
maladministration, corruption, nepotism, fruitless and wasteful expenditure and
purging of staff by the former municipal manager, Mr Mokgele Mojaki, at [the] Ngaka
Modiri Molema District Municipality,” read the Public Protector’s annual
report for 2016/17.
READ | Mkhwebane rails against
accusation she ‘purposely delays’ Section 194 Inquiry against her
“The complainants are former employees of the municipality who were
either suspended, dismissed or engaged in labour disputes against the employer
for raising concerns about the appointment of the municipal manager, and
maladministration and irregular appointment of staff and service
providers.”
The investigation found “Mojaki irregularly appointed several
officials on acting and permanent positions that were allegedly not approved or
not provided for in the organisational structure and/or budget” – and Mojaki
“failed to follow proper recruitment procedures by failing to advertise,
shortlist and interview candidates” for certain vacant positions.
It found he was “involved in the systemic purging of 25 municipal
employees between 2012 and 2014, who had raised questions and concerns about
the alleged irregularities within the municipality”.
The
investigation also found Mojaki’s “conduct constitutes financial
misconduct” and he “failed to follow proper tender processes”.
Among the Public Protector’s remedial findings was that the municipality
institute civil proceedings against Mojaki “for the recovery of all monies
lost by the municipality as a result of his ineptitude and abuse of authority
in respect of his conduct”.
It said the municipality must investigate whether “the
reimbursement which was due to the North West premier’s office by the
municipality for Mr Mojaki’s secondment salary did take place and, if not, take
appropriate steps against the officials responsible for such financial
misconduct”.
News24 could not determine whether this report was reviewed and set
aside by a court.
News24 has requested the Office of the Public Protector to confirm
whether Mataboge worked on this report and whether it was subjected to judicial
review.
The response will be reported once received.
Last Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, the inquiry was scheduled to hear
testimony from Public Protector investigator Bianca Mvuyana.
Her testimony was not heard because of Mkhwebane’s legal team’s dispute
with the Office of the Public Protector regarding their legal fees.
Mvuyana’s testimony will be heard next week.
In an email to News24, Mojaki confirmed he sent the message to Mataboge,
but denied he sought to impede the committee or intimidate Mataboge from
testifying.
He said Mataboge was the lead investigator on the report, which he took
on judicial review.
According to Mojaki, they failed to produce a full Rule 53 record, which
would have included records that would prove his innocence.
“Last year, the office, after August 2022, finally settled that the
matter be set aside after I lost so much money during those five years.”
–
This report has been amended to include Mojaki’s comment..
[ad_2]
Source link