BackThe Public Protector’s provisional report on the investigation into allegations of impropriety and unethical conduct relating to the installation and implementation of security measures by the Department of Public Works at and in respect of the Nkandla private residence of President Jacob Zuma in KwaZulu-Natal has provoked extensive debates among the parties affected.
The Ministers of Police, Defence, State Security and Public Works asked the Court to order the Public Prosecutor not to disclose the report regarding alleged irregularities in public expenditure to implicated persons and to the complainants in the matter and invoked the personal safety of the President as well as of the State in general as grounds for their application.
Prior to this the Public Protector had refused to grant the organs of state concerned more time than the five days she had given them. Due to her point of view, the acceding to the request would have been an injustice on the affected and implicated parties. Leaving the report in the hands of the security cluster for an unduly extended period would have prejudiced particularly those she had made provisional adverse findings against, as well as those she has quoted as having provided her with evidence and who hadn’t received the report at that moment.
After an affidavit filed by the Public Protector, however, the Ministers decided to abandon their urgent application against her. This decision is welcomed both in the interests of co-operative governance and in recognising the autonomy and independence of the Public Protector. She reaffirms her commitment to complete the investigation and final report in relation to the Nkandla project.
