INDEPENDENT Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid) boss Robert McBride has asked the Constitutional Court to confirm that his suspension by the police minister was unlawful.
The Constitutional Court will have the final say on how far the Constitution goes in insulating Ipid and its executive director from political interference.
Last month, the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the laws that had allowed the minister to suspend and remove Mr McBride unilaterally were unconstitutional. However, the order was suspended until the country’s highest court had its say.
Police Minister Nathi Nhleko’s spokesman, Musa Zondi, confirmed that the minister would appeal against the High Court order and the appeal application would be filed by Wednesday.
Mr McBride was suspended last March on allegations that he had covered up alleged involvement by senior Hawks officials in the unlawful renditions of four Zimbabweans.
An initial Ipid report pointed the finger at the Hawks officers, but a second version appeared to exonerate them.
The rendition scandal led to the early exit of former Hawks head Anwa Dramat, with a negotiated package, and disciplinary processes against other officials including head of the elite investigative unit in Gauteng, Shadrack Sibiya, who was subsequently fired.
Mr McBride denied the claims against him and challenged his suspension, saying the Constitution did not allow Mr Nhleko to suspend or discipline him unilaterally.
In his Constitutional Court affidavit, Mr McBride said he was not shying away from disciplinary proceedings. "All I am seeking to do is ensure that such disciplinary proceedings must occur in a manner that protects my independence and that of Ipid," he said.
Mr McBride said the Constitution expressly referred to Ipid as being "independent". This entitled Ipid to "at least the same independence" as the Hawks, he said, because the investigative unit was "a similar institution, but with no express constitutional protection".
The Constitutional Court had previously decided that the Constitution did not allow the minister to suspend or remove the head of the Hawks unilaterally. However, Mr McBride said the Ipid Act, the Public Service Act and regulations governing the police watchdog allowed the minister to suspend, discipline and remove Ipid’s head from office with no parliamentary oversight.
He said the legislative scheme treated the Ipid boss like any other head of department in the public service.
The laws, as they stood, did not afford him the security of tenure required for the national head of Ipid by the Constitution, he said.
Robert McBride. Picture: SOWETAN
INDEPENDENT Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid) boss Robert McBride has asked the Constitutional Court to confirm that his suspension by the police minister was unlawful.
The Constitutional Court will have the final say on how far the Constitution goes in insulating Ipid and its executive director from political interference.
Last month, the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the laws that had allowed the minister to suspend and remove Mr McBride unilaterally were unconstitutional. However, the order was suspended until the country’s highest court had its say.
Police Minister Nathi Nhleko’s spokesman, Musa Zondi, confirmed that the minister would appeal against the High Court order and the appeal application would be filed by Wednesday.
Mr McBride was suspended last March on allegations that he had covered up alleged involvement by senior Hawks officials in the unlawful renditions of four Zimbabweans.
An initial Ipid report pointed the finger at the Hawks officers, but a second version appeared to exonerate them.
The rendition scandal led to the early exit of former Hawks head Anwa Dramat, with a negotiated package, and disciplinary processes against other officials including head of the elite investigative unit in Gauteng, Shadrack Sibiya, who was subsequently fired.
Mr McBride denied the claims against him and challenged his suspension, saying the Constitution did not allow Mr Nhleko to suspend or discipline him unilaterally.
In his Constitutional Court affidavit, Mr McBride said he was not shying away from disciplinary proceedings. "All I am seeking to do is ensure that such disciplinary proceedings must occur in a manner that protects my independence and that of Ipid," he said.
Mr McBride said the Constitution expressly referred to Ipid as being "independent". This entitled Ipid to "at least the same independence" as the Hawks, he said, because the investigative unit was "a similar institution, but with no express constitutional protection".
The Constitutional Court had previously decided that the Constitution did not allow the minister to suspend or remove the head of the Hawks unilaterally. However, Mr McBride said the Ipid Act, the Public Service Act and regulations governing the police watchdog allowed the minister to suspend, discipline and remove Ipid’s head from office with no parliamentary oversight.
He said the legislative scheme treated the Ipid boss like any other head of department in the public service.
The laws, as they stood, did not afford him the security of tenure required for the national head of Ipid by the Constitution, he said.
Change: 0.11%
Change: 0.16%
Change: -0.42%
Change: 0.35%
Change: -0.54%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.11%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: -0.06%
Change: 0.00%
Change: -0.03%
Change: 0.07%
Change: -0.11%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.00%
Data supplied by Profile Data