We need help protecting South Africa’s (our) constitutions!
This is our first campaign as the DA Supporters Abroad Network and it’s an opportunity for us to make a difference. We cannot stand by and let the independence of the National Prosecuting Authority be compromised by the Government. It is our fundamental protection against state abuse and corruption. Without an independent NPA, there is no one who can keep an eye on government officials.
Court cases such as these (and the one the DA fought and won’t last year to give South Africans living abroad the right to vote in the national election) are expensive. The DA needs our help to raise funds to help assist in covering the cost of the court case. Please help by making a donation to help pay for the court case protecting the Constitution. Every bit helps, especially with the South African Rand’s exchange rate.
The application to have Simelane’s appointment declared unlawful and unconstitutional.
Why is Simelane’s appointment as National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) being opposed?
President Zuma’s decision to appoint Menzi Simelane as NDPP was in our view unlawful and unconstitutional. The President acted outside of his powers by appointing a person who is not fit and proper to hold the office of NDPP. President Zuma failed to consider evidence in the public domain which revealed Simelane’s complete disregard for the constitutional principle of prosecutorial independence. This suggests that his decision to appoint Simelane was neither rational nor reasonable. This conclusion is compounded by the fact that he chose to ignore the Public Service Commission’s recommendation that disciplinary action be taken against Simelane. The evidence provided suggests that Zuma appointed Simelane to ensure that powerful ANC leaders, including himself, would be immune from prosecution in the future.
What does the law say about the NDPP?
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act states that the person entrusted with the office of NDPP must be a ‘fit and proper person’ and that due regard must be given to his or her ‘experience, conscientiousness and integrity’. Read with section 179(4) of the Constitution, a person’s fitness for the office of the NDPP must also take account of whether he or she is a person who will fulfil the duties of the office independently and without ‘fear, favour or prejudice’. Evidence from the hearings of the Ginwala Commission suggests that Menzi Simelane does not meet these legal criteria.
Evidence in support of the DA:
- Statements made at the Ginwala Commission hearings reveal that Simelane does not understand or have any respect for the constitutionally prescribed independence of the NPA, as the following states
- His stated belief that the NDPP was accountable to the Director-General of Justice
- His argument that former NDPP Vusi Pikoli was unfit to hold office because of his refusal to account to the Director-General (despite legal opinions Simelane received to the contrary)
- His disputing of the fact that the Constitution guarantees the independence of the NPA
- His belief that it is legitimate for the Minister of Justice to determine whether a particular prosecution is in the public interest and should proceed or not (it emerged that Simelane-on behalf of the former Minister Mabandla-had drafted the instruction to Pikoli to stop the prosecution of National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi)
- Simelane failed to disclose, and then denied that he knew of, correspondence which indicated attempts by government to interfere with the NPA’s investigation and prosecution of Jackie Selebi.
Tellingly, Simelane has taken no steps to deny or counter-act the findings of the Ginwala Commission.
Please help us protect the constitution by donating towards to costs and fees of the court case. Every little helps!