NA Speaker welcomes Constitutional Court judgment in the appeal against the order of the Western Cape High Court in the matter of Public Protector and Speaker of the National Assembly and others
13 July 2023
The Speaker of the National Assembly welcomes the judgement delivered by the Constitutional Court today regarding the appeal application by the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the President against the suspended Public Protector, Adv Busisiwe Mkhwebane. The Public Protector also lodged a cross appeal against the High Court’s decision which effectively set aside the President’s decision to suspend the PP in 2022 pending the outcome of the Section 194 Enquiry.
The PP had, in 2022, brought an application before the WCHC, for an order declaring the conduct of the Speaker, President of RSA and the section 194 Enquiry irrational, unconstitutional and invalid. The conduct related to the decision to proceed with the consideration of the motion for her removal as adopted by the NA, refusal by the Speaker to retract a letter informing the President of the decision, and the President’s decision to initiate a suspension process against her pending the outcome of the s194 Enquiry.
Against the Speaker, she contended that the Speaker was not authorized by the empowering legislation and did not act in good faith in issuing the letter to the President. She contended that the Speaker’s process was intended to trigger her suspension and was based on the incorrect interpretation of section 194(3)(a) of the Constitution. The Speaker’s argument was upheld by the High Court and upheld by the Constitutional Court who affirmed the Speaker’s constitutional obligation to inform the President of the section 194 Committee developments.
As against the section 194 Committee, she invoked the sub judice rule as envisaged in Rule 89 of the NA Rules. She also contended that failure by the NA to amend Rule 129AD(3), which relates to legal representation, was unconstitutional. In dismissing the PP’s argument, the court reiterated that the sub judice rule does not preclude members of the NA from carrying out their oversight mandate and holding Chapter 9 institutions accountable. It also confirmed that there was no need for the NA to amend the impugned Rule as the CC had already taken it upon itself to amend it in its previous ruling.