Ad Hoc Committee calls Senzo Mchunu lawyers’ complaint ‘utterly premature’ over evidentiary overview

The Ad Hoc Committee has rejected a complaint by suspended Police Minister Senzo Mchunu’s legal team about a draft evidential overview, calling the action premature and saying all implicated parties will be given an opportunity to respond.

Committee says evidence leaders only summarised testimony

Parliamentary legal advisor Andile Tetyana told the committee on Thursday night that Mchunu’s lawyers had complained the evidential overview, presented by evidence leaders, prejudiced their client by pre-empting findings across the committee’s terms of reference.

Tetyana said the lawyers argued it was “impermissible for the evidence leaders to step into the shoes of the committee and become decision makers, particularly in circumstances where no party has been afforded the right to make a submission.”

He clarified that evidence leaders were independent legal professionals who assisted the committee by summarising testimony and highlighting discrepancies for the committee’s deliberations. He added that “to refer to the document presented on May 28 as a draft report is a mischaracterisation to say the least. Members decide on the evidence, not the evidence leaders.”

Committee has not yet deliberated on the summary

Tetyana told the committee it had not yet deliberated on the summary of the record and would do so at the appropriate time. He said the committee would ensure that any person it proposed to make adverse findings against would have an opportunity to address those findings.

He said the committee proposed to write to Mchunu’s lawyers to explain that “the committee has not even started deliberations, even on the draft committee report.”

Chair and MPs describe complaint as premature

ANC MP Khusela Sangoni-Diko described the evidential overview as a summary of evidence and said it was “unfortunate and too early for the minister to want to raise what he believes is prejudicial conduct against him.” She added: “We reject the notion that evidence leaders acted outside their scope.”

Committee Chairperson Soviet Lekganyane said the committee would write to Mchunu’s legal team to confirm that the committee was still considering the report and that parties would have sight of the report before it was submitted to the National Assembly. Lekganyane said the lawyers “could have waited before sending the letter, as the committee had not even said a word” and described their action as “utterly premature.”

Next steps and related committee business

The parties indicated they would be ready to discuss the draft evidential overview and committee reports next week. The committee’s secretariat is expected to develop a timetable of meetings, and the committee will request an extension of its June 12 deadline to allow it to submit its report.

Separately, Lekganyane outlined a stand-off with the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence (JSCI) over a report from the Inspector-General on Intelligence into Crime Intelligence’s property purchases and vetting of officials. Lekganyane said he had written to JSCI Chairperson Sylvia Lucas but had not received a response and that he would raise the matter with National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza.

Key quotes

“The lawyers submit that adopting such an approach is prejudicial to their client’s rights.” Andile Tetyana

“Members decide on the evidence, not the evidence leaders.” Andile Tetyana

“The committee is very busy with very serious matters, and they should not bring unnecessary issues before this committee… This action they have embarked upon is utterly premature.” Soviet Lekganyane