The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) protests in vain that "any expectation from the media and the public for the organisation to respond fully on inquiries (about the reasons for the threatened suspension of Adv. Glynnis Breytenbach) is unfair", as was reported this week.

In the normal course of events it would be proper to treat an internal disciplinary process as a confidential matter between employer and employee to protect both parties. But we have not forgotten how the NPA treated the former Head of the Specialised Commercial Crimes Unit (SCCU), where Adv. Breytenbach continues the fight against fraud and corruption.

In April 2010, at the precise time I revealed to the Justice Minister that Adv. Menzi Simelane was trying to disband Willie Hofmeyr's Asset Forfeiture Unit (ASU) by severing the connection between its Head and its prosecutors, the "retirement" of the Head of the SCCU was conveyed to the Public Servants Association (PSA), which published the NPA's communication. The NPA told the PSA that the SCCU was being restructured - decapitated - because Adv. Chris Jordaan was retiring.

Adv. Jordaan was not retiring, as I advised President Zuma on 12 May 2010 during the President's Vote. The President undertook in reply to halt all restructuring pending his performance agreements with Ministers. The "restructuring" has proceeded, and Adv. Jordaan, lo and behold, did retire.

It is our firm impression that efficient corruption busters are put under pressure, moved or moved right out of the NPA.

It is therefore not unfair that we, the media and the public, would like to know why Adv. Breytenbach is under threat of suspension.