Chair of the Portfolio Committee on Police Ian Cameron said the stalled proceedings 'damages parliament’s credibility'
Members of parliament’s ad hoc committee looking into the corruption claims made by KwaZulu-Natal’s top cop stalled proceedings on the first day over questions of independence.
Parliamentarians and the committee’s chief evidence leader debated for an hour over whether statements given to the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry were fit for the ad hoc committee.
A long adjournment was followed by the committee members meeting in private to deliberate on the way forward.
Not a ‘junior committee’
After protocols were observed, EFF leader Julius Malema immediately objected to the use of the word “supplementary” to describe the statement of KZN police commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi to be used by the commission.
Chief evidence leader Advocate Norman Arendse explained that due to Mkhwanzi’s lengthy appearance before the Madlanga commission, the legal team were unable to obtain a separate statement.
Malema stressed that the ad hoc committee should not be seen as a “junior committee” to the Madlanga commission, and that the original statement needed to be obtained.
“In the absence of his statement to the ad hoc committee of parliament, on which basis do you want him to take an oath?” asked Malema.
“You want to use material that is being used and sourced by a commission established by the executive in this separate arm of the state,” Malema argued.
Arendse later attempted to explain that there had been an agreement between the committee and the Madlanga commission to share statements, but was cut short by committee chair Soviet Lekganyane.
‘Constitutional responsibility’
Mkhwanazi rocked the security cluster in July when he made sweeping accusations against Minister of Police Senzo Mchunu and senior police officials.
In the aftermath, President Cyril Ramaphosa established the Madlanaga commission, while parliament formed its own ad hoc committee.
In taking several sessions to determine the committee’s terms of reference, committee members were adamant that Mkhwanazi must appear first.
MK party members Sibonelo Nomvalo and Mandla Skosana backed Malema, saying that “a cut and paste was not acceptable”.
“The doctrine of separation of powers is clear. If you say we must rely on the statement of the Madlanga commission, you are simply subverting the constitutional responsibility of parliament,” said Nomvalo.
Six hours after the adjournment, the ad hoc committee members returned in the afternoon to present a “revamped” statement with adjusted wording, as requested by the committee members.
Mkhwanazi took his oath before the commission and began relaying a version of the statement he had given to the Madlanga commission.
‘Parliament’s credibility damaged’
The delays to the hearing was criticised by Chair of the Portfolio Committee on Police Ian Cameron, who stressed the need to operate with urgency.
“Every hiccup in this process further damages parliament’s credibility. South Africans are watching, expecting decisive action and integrity from their elected representatives, not inefficiency and internal disorder,” said Cameron.
“The mismanagement of this committee undermines not only its mandate but also public confidence in Parliament as an institution.”
NOW READ: ‘Abuse of power’: Malema’s warning as Mkhwanazi heads to Parliament
