Advocate Andy Mothibi’ is expecting to face a tough first day at office with numerous high-profile cases he is inheriting and possibly being slapped with a court application challenging his appointment. AS SHAMILA Batohi concluded her seven-year tenure, incoming National Director of Public Prosecution (NDPP) advocate Andy Mothibi faces immediate challenges including ongoing State Capture prosecutions and a legal challenge to his appointment on his very first day in office A law firm has launched a court challenge against Mothibi’s appointment , claiming the procedure was unlawful despite acknowledging the President’s constitutional powers and not questioning Mothibi’s qualifications for the role. Mothibi has a tough task ahead of him as he takes office today (Monday), as he will be faced with a number of cases that hang over from the Zondo, Mpati, and Nugent Commissions.
This is according to Accountability Now Director Advocate Paul Hoffman SC, who added that Mothibi will now also face possible prosecutions stemming from the Madlanga Commission. But, Hoffman said, it is not legal for the National Prosecuting Authority to take these cases because it is not “a body outside executive control” that the law requires. “Mothibi would be well advised to decline to prosecute corruption cases because they fall outside of the remit of the NPA and all other criminal justice bodies currently in existence”.
Hoffman is of the opinion that this will prompt long overdue and necessary reform that does comply with the binding Constitutional Court judgment in the Glenister case and the “STIRS” requirements. This acronym stands for Specialised, trained, independent, resourced in guaranteed fashion, and secure in tenure of office. Hoffman said we currently do not have an operational and structural framework that effectively deals with the fraudsters and the corrupt in our midst.
[paywall]
He pointed out that international law, domesticated by South Africa, obliges the country to set up and maintain anti-corruption machinery of state that is independent in its operations and structure. He pointed out that the Constitutional Court in the Glenister case found that “our law demands a body outside the executive control to deal effectively with corruption.”
[/paywall]
