The Helen Suzman Foundation says that president Jacob Zuma is wrong when he claims he can do nothing to defuse the mess between finance minister, Pravin Gordhan and the Hawks.<\/p>\n
The independent think-tank noted that Zuma has claimed that he is on the minister\u2019s side: “At least, this is what he says.”<\/p>\n
In a statement released on 25 August, the president expressed \u2018his full support and confidence in the minister of finance\u2019 and emphasised \u2018the fact that the minister has not been found guilty of any wrongdoing\u2019.<\/p>\n
He is also aware that the Hawks\u2019 investigation is an extravagant own-goal, the foundation said. He \u2018noted the concerns\u2019 of civil society and the \u2018negative effect of these matters on our economy\u2019 and the \u2018personal pressure on the individuals affected\u2019. All of this is \u2018disturbing\u2019.<\/p>\n
The think-tank said that given all of this, one would expect the president to take action; however, he has claimed that his hands are constitutionally tied.<\/p>\n
According to the foundation, Zuma does have the power to bring this crisis to heel.<\/p>\n
The President\u2019s options<\/strong><\/p>\n It is correct that the president cannot prevent individual investigations or reverse decisions to prosecute, the Helen Suzman Foundation said.<\/p>\n “The constitution requires that the National Prosecuting Authority (the NPA) exercise its functions \u2018without fear, favour or prejudice\u2019. The Hawks are similarly operationally independent. Section 17B(b)(ii) of the South African Police Service Act enshrines the \u2018necessary independence\u2019 of the Hawks. The Constitutional Court has held, in Glenister I and II (both cases in which the Helen Suzman Foundation participated) that the constitution itself requires this.”<\/p>\n However, the think-tank said that, while the president cannot interfere with specific investigations or prosecutions, he has plenty of power to oversee the Hawks.<\/p>\n “First, under section 17DA of the Police Service Act, a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly can remove the head of the Hawks, Lieutenant-General Berning Ntlemeza, on the grounds of misconduct, incapacity or incompetence.”<\/p>\n “Once the National Assembly begins these proceedings, the minister of police, Mr Nathi Nhleko, may provisionally suspend the head of the Hawks immediately.”<\/p>\n It said that, at best, the allegations against minister Gordhan rest on insufficient facts and a misunderstanding of the law. “This is incompetence,” it said.<\/p>\n “At worst, they are an attempt by the Hawks to capture the Treasury for corrupt elites. This is misconduct,” the foundation said.<\/p>\n “The breathtaking weakness of the Hawks\u2019 case against the Minister has been overwhelmingly established by the press, civil society\u00a0 and legal experts. The legal grounds to remove Mr Ntlemeza are there.”<\/p>\n The Helen Suzman Foundation noted that it is the National Assembly, not the president, that has the power to remove the head of the Hawks; and it is the minister of police that has the power of suspension, not the president.<\/p>\n “But President Zuma has considerable influence over the ANC caucus in Parliament (and indications are that the Democratic Alliance and the Economic Freedom Fighters would only be too happy to help the ANC get the two-thirds majority it needs to remove Mr Ntlemeza).”<\/p>\n “Once the National Assembly has started proceedings, president Zuma can instruct Minister Nhleko to suspend Mr Ntlemeza. If he refuses, the president can fire him,” it said.<\/p>\n Even if President Zuma cannot do this (if he cannot corral the necessary super-majority in the National Assembly, for example), he has another route available to him, the think-tank said.<\/p>\n As the Menzi Simelane case showed, the courts can set aside a decision to appoint a public servant if that decision was irrational, and the decision to appoint might be irrational if the individual appointed is clearly dishonest. No less than two judges have noted Mr Ntlemeza\u2019s dishonesty, the group said.<\/p>\n “Thus, the president can approach a court to have the decision to appoint Mr Ntlemeza set aside. He doesn\u2019t even have to do this on his own, as such a case is already before both the High Court and the Constitutional Court,” the foundation said.<\/p>\n It stressed that the persecution of minister Gordhan poses a grave danger to South Africa’s economy and the country’s institutions.<\/p>\n “President Zuma knows this, and he should do something. Fortunately, he can,” the foundation said.<\/p>\n Gordhan is vindicating the law by ignoring police unit<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n This is what Gordhan is being charged for as early as next week \u2013 report<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\nMore on politics<\/h3>\n