The IFP notes the ruling of the North Gauteng High Court on the Public Protector/Gordhan matter with serious concern with regard to the functionality and competence of the Office of the Public Protector.
What comes out of the ruling is a clear indication that the Office of the Public Protector has a questionable sense of judgement.
The implications of this judgement for the Public Protector are very serious, and motivate further the reasons for Parliament to investigate her competence and fitness to hold office.
The IFP is concerned at the pattern the Public Protector is employing wherein she is seemingly anchoring her work in the current political battles within the governing party.
The basics on due process insofar a judicial review is concerned that were spelt out by the Judge should ordinarily be elementary to a Public Protector.
It is a serious indictment on the Public Protector for the Judge to find that the report is “…vague, contradictory and nonsensical…”; this finding speaks of a report that was clearly not thought through in law but was haphazardly done for political expediency.
The spate of adverse court judgements against the Public Protector are equally of serious concern.
The IFP maintains that the independence of the Public Protector is of paramount importance for our democratic discourse and should at all times act within the confines of the constitution.
Mkhuleko Hlengwa MP
IFP National Spokesperson
071 111 0539