The public protector‚ Thuli Madonsela‚ has come out fighting after strong criticism by parliament and President Jacob Zuma.
Madonsela told a media briefing that she stood by her conclusion that Zuma should pay back some of the money spent on upgrading his Nkandla residence.
Zuma had been alerted as early as November 2009 to possible over-spending. “Yes‚ the president should have done something. At the time the cost estimate was R65m‚” she said.
She said that “the president was‚ by his own admission‚ interacting with officials“.
“The finding was that the president and his family had unduly benefited. It is in line was the form of improper conduct” referred to in Public Protector act.
Referring to the claim that the Nkandla swimming pool was a fire pool‚ she said: “It is clearly a swimming pool with fire-fighting functionalities“.
Madonsela outlined the process she had followed after the Nkandla investigation “was duly requested by a member of parliament“.
She said Zuma had been given 14 days to respond in terms of legislation. He had done so in a report submitted by his lawyers and the report had been issued to the public in March 2014.
She dismissed criticism that she had released the report to the public instead of to parliament. “The practice of releasing reports to the media predates the current public protector.”
It was “patently unfair and untrue” that she had failed to furnish parliament with reports. “This office has never failed to present a requested report.” This was despite the fact that there was “no obligation to submit any report to parliament“.
“Parliament’s role is that of oversight and not that of the executive‚” she said.
Public protector adamant Zuma must pay back some of money
Madonsela told a media briefing that she stood by her conclusion that Zuma should pay back some of the money spent on upgrading his Nkandla residence.
Zuma had been alerted as early as November 2009 to possible over-spending. “Yes‚ the president should have done something. At the time the cost estimate was R65m‚” she said.
She said that “the president was‚ by his own admission‚ interacting with officials“.
“The finding was that the president and his family had unduly benefited. It is in line was the form of improper conduct” referred to in Public Protector act.
Referring to the claim that the Nkandla swimming pool was a fire pool‚ she said: “It is clearly a swimming pool with fire-fighting functionalities“.
Madonsela outlined the process she had followed after the Nkandla investigation “was duly requested by a member of parliament“.
She said Zuma had been given 14 days to respond in terms of legislation. He had done so in a report submitted by his lawyers and the report had been issued to the public in March 2014.
She dismissed criticism that she had released the report to the public instead of to parliament. “The practice of releasing reports to the media predates the current public protector.”
It was “patently unfair and untrue” that she had failed to furnish parliament with reports. “This office has never failed to present a requested report.” This was despite the fact that there was “no obligation to submit any report to parliament“.
“Parliament’s role is that of oversight and not that of the executive‚” she said.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos