In the meantime, Magistrate Adriaan Bekker would also consider the media’s application to broadcast the proceedings.
#Publicprotector#BusisiweMkhwebane has arrived at the Pta Mag Court ahead of her first appearance on charges of perjury @TheCitizen Newspic.twitter.com/foy47skjpi
The charges against Mkhwebane relate to allegations that she lied under oath about meetings she had had with former president Jacob Zuma, in affidavits submitted to the North Gauteng High Court and the Pretoria Regional Court in 2017 and 2018 respectively.
Paul Hoffmann – who heads up lobby group Accountability Now – opened the case against Mkhwebane in 2019, on the back of a scathing Constitutional Court judgment in which she was found personally liable for close to R1 milion worth of legal fees the SA Reserve Bank racked up reviewing Mkhwebane’s findings in the Bankorp matter.
Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane appeared in the magistrate’s court in Pretoria on Thursday morning, charged with three counts of perjury. Mkhwebane is accused of having lied to the courts over her SA Reserve Bank investigation – and becomes the first sitting head of a Chapter 9 institut.
The criminal complaint was laid by lobby group, Accountability Now, in July 2019 after a Constitutional Court (ConCourt) ruling that upheld a Pretoria High Court judgment, which found that she was dishonest regarding the meetings she had had with former president Jacob Zuma in affidavits submitted to the court and the Pretoria Regional Court in 2017 and 2018, respectively.
The ConCourt also ordered that she personally cover 15% of the SARB’s legal costs in the case.
In an interview with
The Citizen, political economy analyst Daniel Silke said the public protector’s remarks could be seen as undermining the country’s judiciary.
“Those who have had judgments against them often want to criticise the system or to disparage the broader system. We are moving into an era in which the justice system and its bona fide is questioned in this way. It delegitimises such a critical foundation of the country,” Silke said.
More than once, Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane has been accused of lying to the courts. The issue raised its head again this week in a Constitutional Court ruling which in other respects was favourable to Mkhwebane.
The question at the heart of the latest Constitutional Court judgment was whether the South African Revenue Services (Sars) could withhold former president Jacob Zuma’s tax information on the grounds that taxpayers’ information is protected under the Tax Administration Act, or whether the Public Protector had the right to access that information by means of her subpoena powers, as she maintained.
A high court judgment on the matter previously found that the protection of taxpayer information was part of the constitutional right to privacy, and “serves the important purpose of encouraging voluntary disclosure by taxpayers”. It ordered Mkhwebane to pay 85% of Sars’ legal costs in her personal capacity.