The Office of the ANC Chief Whip notes the response of the Public
Protector to our criticism of her decision to send a letter to the
President. We vehemently reject her wild and baseless accusation that we
don’t respect the Constitution and that we are interfering in her lawful
duties. It has become that Office’s habit to label and demonise those
who disagree with it on matters of principle.

We remain unfazed and firm in our belief that, by directly writing to
the President regarding his report which is currently before a process
of Parliament, she has demonstrated disregard for the authority of
Parliament and lack of confidence in its lawful processes.

The Public Protector’s response, as expected, belabours allegations and
labels, but fails to deal with simple, principled and direct issues we
have raised:

1. How does the Public Protector reconcile her earlier constitutionally
and procedurally sound position to allow a Parliamentary process to take
its course with her letter to the President complaining about the
alleged inadequacy of his report?

2. By writing to the President regarding the “Secure in Comfort” report –
which she has concluded and is now ready for formal consideration by
Parliament – she is encroaching on the constitutional authority of the
institution. Essentially, her action establishes a parallel process that
not only duplicates the work of the ad hoc committee but also renders
the parliamentary process meaningless. Our constitutional institutions
ought to respect and complement each other’s powers and functions rather
than compete and undermine each other.

The Public Protector, like any South African, has the right to disagree
and criticise our views. However, she should at least attempt to provide
the nation with clarify regarding the principled matters we have raised.
Her yesterday’s statement, although lengthy, has regrettably left the
public none the wiser.