Madonsela’s joining of EFF shows her bias towards opposition - ANC

BY CHARL BOSCH - OCTOBER 13, 2015

Public Protector Thuli Madonsela has reportedly expressed shock after being accused by the ruling African National Congress (ANC) for her decision to join the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) in challenging President Jacob Zuma’s rejection of her Nkandla report.

Last week, Madonsela announced that she had been given permission by the Constitutional Court to align with the party in opposing the acceptance of the similar findings by Police Minister Nathi Nhleko, which cleared Zuma of paying back a portion of the R246-million as recommend in her Secure in Comfort report.

Reacting to the ruling, ANC Spokesperson in the Office of Chief Whip Stone Sizani, Moloto Mothapo, said Madonsela’s appointment as a third party respondent in the matter, has tarnished the image of the Public Protector’s office as “an Chapter Nine institution that is politically impartial”, and that she had made “a mockery of the very principles she ought to uphold”.

“Legal cases brought by the likes of the EFF and DA, far from being about the defense of the rule of law and the Constitution as they often claim, are naturally driven by oppositional political interests. It would be naive for anyone, least of all the Public Protector, to believe otherwise,” Mothapo said on Politicsweb.

“If the Public Protector had similar interest in the legal matter brought by the EFF, she could have brought her case before the Court separately instead of jumping into a political bandwagon of the EFF”.

He also stated that Madonsela’s recent decision to attend an event hosted by the DA and advising her daughter to join the EFF, illustrates an abuse of power and further fuels suspicion about her biasness towards opposition parties.

“Her lack of political sensitivity and disregard for perceptions are reflective of someone who lacks wisdom and discernment,” Mothapo said.

In an interview with CityPress on Monday evening, Madonsela said the comments amounted to threats over her fitness to occupy the position of Public Protector.

“The decision to join the EFF in the matter was informed by the "nothing about us without us" principle. In other words, the Public Protector sought to avoid a situation where her office's powers are determined without her input,” she said.

“The Public Protector confined herself to the powers of the office and not the merits of the EFF's argument. This is because the Public Protector believes that her report speaks for itself”.