Here's what you had to say about the Public Protector, ConCourt and Ramaphosa's Bosasa donation

2019-07-27 08:10
Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane and President Cyril Ramaphosa.

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane and President Cyril Ramaphosa.

Multimedia   ·   User Galleries   ·   News in Pictures Send us your pictures  ·  Send us your stories

It's been a week in which the president and the Public Protector have both been mired in controversy as a result of her controversial reports. Here's what readers had to say about President Cyril Ramaphosa's Bosasa donation, the Constitutional Court's ruling on Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane's SARS report and all things related.

I believe that Ramaphosa should come clean and not intimidate the Public Protector by taking the findings on review.

If he does that we as the public will have a suspicion that he is hiding something because we were worried when we heard that SACP delegates were given R5 000 as pocket money to the Nasrec conference and now there is this huge money in the CR17 account.

- TA Ntumba


In response to Ralph Mathekga's column, Ramaphosa might be on firm legal ground, but has a serious political problem.

It's interesting to note that, even commentators miss asking another question: if Ramaphosa is expected to reveal source of the R300m, why are the other campaigners not required to also disclose how much they raised, and from whom?

- Sello Rabele


Firstly, is there any piece of legislation that regulates party political funding? If the answer is "no" then there is no basis for political accountability. There has been many campaigns before inside and outside the ANC and yet nobody knows how much funding they got and from whom. It might happen that the campaign of NDZ or any other candidates raised more than R300m - we don't know. 

Yes, political parties and some within the ruling party might try to use it politically but it won't gain much ground. If the court rules in favour of Cyril then it will be an uphill battle for other political parties. The campaign managers of CR17 have publicly said he was not aware of who donated money to the campaign. So how do we expect him to declare what he did not know?

The conduct of the PP in various reports has led to the majority of citizens pointing out bias in her Bosasa report. The 2017 conference was fiercely contested so it means millions of rand was needed to run a campaign of that magnitude.

- Martin Serero

North West Province


In response to Serjeant at the Bar's column, The legal argument for removing the Public Protector.

Thank you for a good overview. I believe that underlying both the current weaknesses in the USA and here in terms of constitutional challenges is the conflation of behaviours that are illegal and/or unethical. 

Ethical behaviour is not just legal or illegal but also of a higher level than mere non-criminality in criminal law but also of such a standard that one is above reproach in civil law. It is called "keeping your hands clean". In assessing one's own behaviour one should consider not one's own individual behaviour but that of an ethical person in one's position and the damage that unethical behaviour can do to one's office.

In the case of the Public Protector she has clearly been found guilty of behaviour that is so unethical as to be criminally unethical, i.e. perjury. Ethical behaviour would require immediate resignation unless she fails to see the damage holding on will do to the credibility of that office. The damage caused may be irreversible or take years to correct.

As far as the case of the president deliberately misleading Parliament, more time should be spent on the exact question he was asked. The value of an answer depends squarely on the question asked.

It is time for us to up the game in ethics if corruption is to be contained. Will we do our best to be ethical or will we be judged by mere non-criminal behaviour?

- Krynauw Nel, architect

Johannesburg 


In response to Melanie Verwoerd's column, Mkhwebane contradicts herself and makes no sense in Bosasa report.

She couldn't have explained it better and, well, the PP's report is misleading in my view. The campaign of the party president and the county are two different matters and should be not be treated the same way. All political leaders were somehow funded in their different party campaigns and they are no different from President Ramaphosa.

Let's assume the ANC lost would she have probed this matter? The simple answer is no. There is a lot the PP should be concerned with rather than attacking President Ramaphosa in his personal capacity. We might start to think she is an enemy of progress and good governance. If the PP thinks she has a duty to the citizens of this country let her probe all the funding related to all presidential candidates of all political parties to prove that she does not take sides or shows no impartiality, else she must just accept that this was an error on her part and put this matter behind her.

We shouldn't waste state resources on matters of no interest in the well-being of this country and her office should know that better than anyone. That is my personal view on this matter and I hope the judgment will concur with a lot of us who think that this was not even supposed to have been probed in the first place. Let's build this country and support those that are trying their utmost best to take this country forward. 

- Tsoai Motlokwa Mabaso


Although I'm not politically interested, I agree with Melanie Verwoerd. Our PP seems to be losing direction more especially on this case of the Bosasa donation. The campaign and personal gain don't mix up. There are many cases that are outstanding that she is supposed to be following before it is too late. More money leaving the country illegally. More spaza shops of illegal immigrants in locations and rural areas. They don't bank their cash, they send it out of the country without paying tax. That is why our country is becoming poorer every day.

- Martin Mashego


In response to Mpumelelo Mkhabela's column, The small mistakes that could destroy Ramaphosa politically.

Mr Mkhabela appears to be tailoring a straight jacket approach for President Ramaphosa’s public posture and conduct. First of all, the president is primarily three figures, namely, 1. the person, Mr Ramaphosa, 2. the president of the ANC, and 3. the president of the Republic of SA.

On both tests of correctness and reasonableness, the president has not committed any fundamental and material mistake of alarming proportion warranting attention of any quantum. So far, he has correctly behaved as a normal reasonable person, given the duty of having to lead society with a knack for carefulness and dutifulness.

- LT Somtseu, local government Eastern Cape


Interesting article. I however need to find out from you whether the point raised in the report that as a deputy president of the country Mr Ramaphosa should have disclosed the funding for his campaign. 

On your point that the president should walk the talk, I totally agree. He should not try hard to be different from JZ, but stay in the rule of law lane.

I must admit I have not yet read the full report, only read it from the online articles as I was out of the country.

- Zandile Motsie 


On Busisiwe Mkhwebane

I don't have respect for her because she is playing into the political space and is anti-Ramaphosa and pro Ace and Zuma. 

L.B Rustenburg 


NEXT ON NEWS24X

Inside News24

 
Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.
 
English
Afrikaans
isiZulu

Hello 

Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.


Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.