In the sharp-edged arena of a judicial inquiry, where every admission is weaponized, the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) has thrown its weight behind a figure under fire: outgoing National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) Shamila Batohi.
This comes after Batohi faced a fierce cross-examination at the Nkabinde Inquiry, which is probing the fitness of suspended Johannesburg prosecutions boss Andrew Chauke. Led by advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, the questioning targeted Batohi’s decisions in high-profile cases, including the racketeering charges against former Hawks boss Johan Booysen and the withdrawal of charges against former crime-intelligence head Richard Mdluli.
Some legal experts pounced on her admissions, suggesting they eroded public trust in the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). But OUTA is pushing back hard, calling that view “extremely prejudicial.”
Calm Under Fire: A Defence of Process
Stefanie Fick, head of OUTA’s accountability division, argues that Batohi’s performance must be judged on her entire testimony, not just the tough cross-examination. “Our system is an adversarial system,” Fick notes. “Batohi faced a nasty cross-examination but she stayed calm and collected. I am of the view she handled it well.”
The specific criticisms have centered on Batohi’s concession that she doesn’t read every docket before making decisions and that one charge in the inquiry’s terms of reference was incorrect. To critics, this signals a hands-off approach. OUTA, however, sees a professional adhering to reality.
Context Over Soundbites
On the docket issue, Fick clarifies, “It is not a concession. It is a practice approved by our courts. The NDPP is not expected to read all dockets.” The role, she implies, is one of strategic oversight, not micro-managementa point of administrative practicality often lost in political soundbites.
Regarding the disputed charge, Fick frames Batohi’s correction as a mark of integrity. “If it is incorrect, it is incorrect and she should point that out. That is what an honest witness does.”
The Bigger Picture: Trust vs. Theatre
For OUTA, an organization that has often been a critical watchdog of state institutions, this defence is significant. It suggests a distinction between performative courtroom drama and substantive governance. Batohi’s refusal to lose her temper, her adherence to factual corrections even when they might seem inconvenient, is portrayed not as weakness, but as steady professionalism in a highly charged process.
As Batohi’s term concludes in February, and with Ngcukaitobi’s cross-examination set to continue, the debate over her legacy is intensifying. OUTA’s intervention makes a clear argument: in the search for accountability, we should value the honest witness over the perfect soundbite, and judge a leader on their full testimony, not just their most challenging moments in the dock.
