Nhleko trying to tell Parliament when and how high to jump – but he is jumping the gun
25 November 2016
The Democratic Alliance believes that Police Minister Nhleko’s request for Parliament to initiate removal proceedings against IPID Executive Director, Robert McBride, may be premature, and jumping the gun in terms of fair and just procedure. The Minister’s request was conveyed in a letter to the Speaker of the National Assembly that was tabled in this morning’s ATC.
While the letter says that he is requesting a parliamentary enquiry into McBride’s fitness to hold office, he is actually requesting the initiation of removal proceedings based on sections 17DA(3) to 17DA(5) of the SAPS Act, as currently read into the IPID Act.
The DA will write to Speaker Baleka Mbete, urging that she obtain legal advice concerning both the shortcomings of the Minister’s request and the soundness of our alternative proposal for how this matter should be handled. There are constitutional principles at stake and any actions taken must be based on due process and done uncompromisingly by the book.
In September, the Constitutional Court specifically determined, as the DA contended, that the Police Minister has absolutely no authority to summarily suspend McBride without Parliament instituting the necessary processes. We believe that a parliamentary enquiry, based on the Rules of the National Assembly, which would receive representations from both the Minister and McBride would be a more appropriate first step in response to the Minister's request.
This is because parliamentary proceedings, based on sections 17DA(3) to 17DA(5) of the SAPS Act, as currently read into the IPID Act, presuppose an intended end – removal from office – as opposed to being an open-ended process that could result in any outcome. For this to be just and fair, there would first need to have been a finding of wrongdoing by McBride which is currently not an established fact.
Indeed, the Minister writes in his letter as if it is a foregone conclusion that McBride should be suspended, his mind is made up on the underlying assumption of guilt and thus Parliament should just rubber-stamp his determination. We will not allow Parliament to be undermined by the Minister thinking that this matter is a question of him simply telling the legislature when and how high to jump.
The Minister’s allegations of misconduct on the part of McBride must certainly be tested to determine their merit.
It is however vital that the correct legal basis is used in response to the Minister’s request, in the interest of justice and fairness and to prevent further costly litigation in this matter.
Issued by Zakhele Mbhele, DA Shadow Minister of Police, 25 November 2016
Nhleko trying to tell Parliament when and how high to jump – Zakhele Mbhele
DA says Minister is jumping the gun with his request to initiate removal proceedings against McBride
Nhleko trying to tell Parliament when and how high to jump – but he is jumping the gun
25 November 2016
The Democratic Alliance believes that Police Minister Nhleko’s request for Parliament to initiate removal proceedings against IPID Executive Director, Robert McBride, may be premature, and jumping the gun in terms of fair and just procedure. The Minister’s request was conveyed in a letter to the Speaker of the National Assembly that was tabled in this morning’s ATC.
While the letter says that he is requesting a parliamentary enquiry into McBride’s fitness to hold office, he is actually requesting the initiation of removal proceedings based on sections 17DA(3) to 17DA(5) of the SAPS Act, as currently read into the IPID Act.
The DA will write to Speaker Baleka Mbete, urging that she obtain legal advice concerning both the shortcomings of the Minister’s request and the soundness of our alternative proposal for how this matter should be handled. There are constitutional principles at stake and any actions taken must be based on due process and done uncompromisingly by the book.
In September, the Constitutional Court specifically determined, as the DA contended, that the Police Minister has absolutely no authority to summarily suspend McBride without Parliament instituting the necessary processes. We believe that a parliamentary enquiry, based on the Rules of the National Assembly, which would receive representations from both the Minister and McBride would be a more appropriate first step in response to the Minister's request.
This is because parliamentary proceedings, based on sections 17DA(3) to 17DA(5) of the SAPS Act, as currently read into the IPID Act, presuppose an intended end – removal from office – as opposed to being an open-ended process that could result in any outcome. For this to be just and fair, there would first need to have been a finding of wrongdoing by McBride which is currently not an established fact.
Indeed, the Minister writes in his letter as if it is a foregone conclusion that McBride should be suspended, his mind is made up on the underlying assumption of guilt and thus Parliament should just rubber-stamp his determination. We will not allow Parliament to be undermined by the Minister thinking that this matter is a question of him simply telling the legislature when and how high to jump.
The Minister’s allegations of misconduct on the part of McBride must certainly be tested to determine their merit.
It is however vital that the correct legal basis is used in response to the Minister’s request, in the interest of justice and fairness and to prevent further costly litigation in this matter.
Issued by Zakhele Mbhele, DA Shadow Minister of Police, 25 November 2016
