MPs want forensic fraud examiner Paul O’Sullivan to come back and complete his evidence before the Ad Hoc Committee.
Image: Armand Hough / Independent Newspapers
Parliament is facing a significant challenge as it contemplates action against forensic fraud examiner Paul O’Sullivan, who left abruptly during his testimony before the Ad Hoc Committee investigating allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
The incident has sparked a unanimous demand from various political parties for O'Sullivan to return and complete his evidence, with some MPs calling for his arrest and contempt charges for undermining the committee’s authority.
The tension escalated during O’Sullivan’s second appearance, when he walked out of the hearing after requesting to leave, primarily to catch a flight.
While evidence leader Advocate Bongiwe Mkhize was in the midst of questioning him, O’Sullivan’s abrupt departure provoked outrage among committee members.
In a break shortly after his exit, MPs insisted that parliamentary legal services should prepare legal advice on the situation.
Legal advisor Andile Tetyana said there were still certain people he needed to consult first.
“We just want to get the facts right before we give the advice, and we can give the committee something no later than tomorrow in writing,” said Tetyana.
However, the response did little to satisfy members, who felt the matter required urgent attention.
ActionSA MP Dereleen James could not understand what consultation was needed for.
“The entire country has been watching how Mr Paul O’Sullivan has been undermining the work of this committee since day one, before he even appeared before us, sending us threats, calling us names. What are we going to consult about at this point?” she asked.
Criticism continued from EFF leader Julius Malema, who questioned the legal team’s lack of urgency in responding to O’Sullivan’s behaviour, suggesting that they should have anticipated the situation given O’Sullivan's previous threats to walk out.
“If you are not going to act on that guy, we’d rather close this committee now because we're going to be subjected to that humiliation,” said Malema.
Committee Chairperson, Soviet Lekganyane, insisted on the importance of a calculated approach and written opinion be prepared.
“If we were going to do these things in a rush or in haste, it is not always that the committee agrees with the opinions of the advice that you give. I want us to avoid the situation where we do things like this way where you just pull out a document, and you start reading. It's not going to help us,” he said after Tetyana tried to give oral advice.
Lekganyane said the legal team should be given time to apply its mind.
“If we have to consult outside of the services that we can offer, we do that, and we produce a written opinion for you, as you always request, as the committee. I think that is what will help us, but if we are going to microwave now, I can tell you we will not get what we want,” he added.
In response to the mounting pressure, National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza expressed her intention to request an urgent report from Lekganyane detailing the day’s events, including O’Sullivan’s departure.
“Upon receipt and consideration of this report, the Speaker will determine what action, if any, may be necessary in terms of the Powers and Privileges Act and the Rules of the National Assembly to safeguard the integrity of Parliament and to ensure that its constitutional mandate is not undermined,” said parliamentary spokesperson Moloto Mothapo.
Mothapo said witnesses appearing before committees were expected to cooperate fully with proceedings and to respect the authority of Parliament.
The EFF has taken a firm stance, calling for charges of contempt against O’Sullivan and referring to him as a fugitive, whom it feared would flee the country.
“We call on SAPS at OR Tambo International Airport, where O'Sullivan claims to be departing to, to apprehend a fugitive of the law, and for Airports Company South Africa to refuse any private aircraft carrying this fugitive to depart from South Africa.”
In a letter to Didiza, EFF Chief Whip Nontando Nolutshungu asked her to protect the dignity of Parliament by laying a charge of contempt of Parliament against O’Sullivan.
“The charge must be opened by you, as the ultimate authority in Parliament. This is necessary to restore confidence in society that Parliament is not to be trampled on,” said Nolutshungu.
EFF MP Leigh-Ann Mathys said Didiza had replied to their letter, saying she was waiting for legal advice before acting.
She said they were not surprised because Didiza had not acted when O'Sullivan threatened a witness and did not issue a subpoena for him and North West businessman Brown Mogotsi.
“We acted because we are dealing with what looks like a captured Parliament that has no interest in the people. Instead, they protect someone whose citizenship we don’t know,” she said after the Red Berets opened criminal charges against O’Sullivan for alleged breach of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures at the Cape Town Central police station.
The Ad Hoc Committee members remain united in their insistence that O’Sullivan complete his testimony.
uMkhonto weSizwe MP Sibonelo Nomvalo said: “The manner in which he left the House warrants a subpoena.”
ANC MP Xola Nqola even suggested that he appear by Tuesday, and be subpoenaed if he did not pitch up.
Other MPs voiced differing opinions regarding the necessity of such an action.
Lekganyane assured that they will write to O’Sullivan to indicate that he should appear before the committee so as to prove that reasonable action was taken to issue a subpoena.
mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za