The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

Public Protector Adv Thuli Madonsela has expressed her disappointment at the incorrect public statements attributed to Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) Chief Executive Jimmy Manyi. The comments were published in the City Press yesterday.
In a front page article titled “Manyi slams Madonsela” and a column on page 4 under the heading “Manyi responds to Public Protector”, Mr Manyi challenged “assertions in the media attributed to her (the Public Protector)”.
These assertions, according to Mr Manyi, were that while he was the Director-General of the Department of Labour, he “did not comply with public service prescripts” by not disclosing his interests relating to the Black Management Forum (BMF).
Mr Manyi is also reported to have said the representations he made after receiving the Public Protector’s provisional report were not factored into the final report, which was released last Wednesday.
The Public Protector wishes to put on record that nowhere in her report did she suggest that Mr Manyi did not declare his interests while he was the DG of the Department of Labour.
The Public Protector’s report states that, though Mr Manyi did declare his interests including those in the BMF, he did not declare a conflict of interest in terms of the Financial Disclosure Framework (FDF).
In addition, the report says Mr Manyi failed to manage the conflict of interest identified through the FDF for Senior Managers. This required him to manage the conflict effectively by excusing himself from certain duties and responsibilities that resulted or would have resulted in him being influenced by the conflict.
It is also not true that the representations made by Mr Manyi on the Public Protector’s provisional report were not included in the final report as these are covered extensively on pages 19 and 20 of the report. It is important to note that the Public Protector considers all comments from parties and only those with merit are incorporated into the final report.
Mr Manyi is further said to have mentioned that he only received the final report the night before the Public Protector’s media briefing but did not disclose that he had been afforded ample time to respond to the Public Protector’s provisional report.
As a matter of fact, Mr Manyi had two opportunities to engage with the Public Protector’s provisional report and a final draft on 4 April 2011 and 8 July 2011 respectively.