Public protector claims only God can remove her from office

TheChamp

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
57,358
Like the DA MP recused herself these lot can't possibly expect their election to a committee probing their PP to go unchallenged. They have already decided she's innocent so can't be expected to sit in impartial judgement of her.

I hear you, but if we all agree that she is still a PP and she occupies the office lawfully, can't it be argued that them showing support is the same as anyone supporting any other chapter 9 institution or even the judiciary?

Does saying they support her means they have declared her innocent, has those who have been critical of her means they have already declared her guilty? Are they so not allowed to be on the panel since they can't possibly be impartial?

Who is allowed to sit on this panel, anyone who has never uttered a word about the PP?
 

schumi

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
25,085
DA submits 7,000 pages of 'evidence' in case against Mkhwebane

The DA has submitted over 7,000 pages of supplementary evidence to National Assembly speaker Thandi Modise to strengthen its motion for the removal of Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane from office. In January, Modise approved a DA request for parliament to initiate proceedings for the removal of Mkhwebane from office. This follows the adoption in December by the National Assembly of new rules concerning the removal of office bearers at institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Office of the Public Protector.

More at : https://www.timeslive.co.za/politic...-pages-of-evidence-in-case-against-mkhwebane/
 

schumi

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
25,085
‘More colleagues to speak out' against Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane

Johannesburg - Further troubles are likely to pile up for Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane as more staff in her office are willing to speak out on claims of victimisation.

This is according to Public Servants Association (PSA) assistant general manager Reuben Maleka in an interview with Independent Media yesterday.

The trade union on Thursday held a meeting with members at the public protector’s office in preparation for its submission to the parliamentary inquiry into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office.

Maleka said they called the meeting to consolidate their plan and find out if there were members willing to voice their unhappiness or felt victimised.

More at : https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics...-public-protector-busisiwe-mkhwebane-43272000
 

yebocan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
14,008
Guess the Justice Minister will be asked ...

 

yebocan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
14,008
Why not ask the Cat?
...lol ... unlike Mbeki, the Buffalo knows exactly what the internal state of play is within the ruling party...we are in good hands , planing for the future --least we want another Zuma to **** ZA over.
 

TheChamp

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
57,358
...lol ... unlike Mbeki, the Buffalo knows exactly what the internal state of play is within the ruling party...we are in good hands , planing for the future --least we want another Zuma to **** ZA over.
So he can recuse himself but he still reserves the right to appoint someone? That does not sound right to me, what does the law say on this?
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
92,823
So he can recuse himself but he still reserves the right to appoint someone? That does not sound right to me, what does the law say on this?

He should recuse himself as he's the subject of a PP investigation, this way there can be no speculation wrt his motives, power of office etc etc.

He does not choose the new candidate. People are nominated, there's an ad-hoc committee that looks at submitted CV's (there were 59 for dep pp) and conducts interviews. A shortlist is created, there are further interviews etc etc & at the end of the day the national assembly submits the selected persons name to squirrel to rubberstamp as the new PP.

I don't see any issue here.

The appointment process for judges are exactly the same except done by the jsc.
 

TheChamp

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
57,358
He should recuse himself as he's the subject of a PP investigation, this way there can be no speculation wrt his motives, power of office etc etc.

He does not choose the new candidate. People are nominated, there's an ad-hoc committee that looks at submitted CV's (there were 59 for dep pp) and conducts interviews. A shortlist is created, there are further interviews etc etc & at the end of the day the national assembly submits the selected persons name to squirrel to rubberstamp as the new PP.

I don't see any issue here.

The appointment process for judges are exactly the same except done by the jsc.

I think you missed my point, I do understand that he is implicated. This is the part I was talking about, the candidate I am talking about is the person who would exercise these sort of power if he cannot as a President.
Although the president is not a Member of Parliament and would, therefore, not deliberate on the matter, he could be required to exercise his powers to suspend the Public Protector once the probe gets under way, and dismiss her if she is found to be unfit.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
92,823
I think you missed my point, I do understand that he is implicated. This is the part I was talking about, the candidate I am talking about is the person who would exercise these sort of power if he cannot as a President.

The constitution is clear on that,

Acting President

90. (1) When the President is absent from the Republic or otherwise unable to fulfil the duties of President, or during a vacancy in the office of President, an office-bearer in the order below acts as President:

(a) The Deputy President.

(b) A Minister designated by the President.

(c) A Minister designated by the other members of the Cabinet.

(d) The Speaker, until the National Assembly designates one of its other members.

Mabuza was also the subject of a PP investigation and there is ongoing court cases wrt that investigation as well.
 

ToxicBunny

Oi! Leave me out of this...
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
113,498
BREAKING: Pretoria High Court finds that the activities of CR17 campaign was that of private individuals and involved private - and NOT public - funds. Court finds PP DID NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO INVESTIGATE CR17 CAMPAIGN.


I do like that the judgement also blasted her for complete lack of understanding of basic law.

Tweet or Press Conference blaming the judges and their connection to WMC in short order of course.
 
Top