'Ulterior motive' in Jiba lawsuit
Advocate Nomgcobo Jiba has questioned the motivation and independence of the General Council of the Bar of South Africa (GCB) in lodging an application to have her name struck from the roll of advocates.
|||Pretoria - Deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions, advocate Nomgcobo Jiba, has questioned the motivation and independence of the General Council of the Bar of South Africa (GCB) in lodging an application to have her name struck from the roll of advocates.
Her advocate, Norman Arendse SC, told the high court in Pretoria on Monday there were other options open to the GCB if it felt she was not a fit and proper person to act as an advocate. The options, he said, included a disciplinary hearing by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), for which she worked or to ask President Jacob Zuma to order an inquiry into her fitness for office.
Arendse argued that Jiba would at least be able to defend herself at those hearings, as opposed to motion proceedings, where her case is presented by way of written affidavits and arguments presented to court. The GCB is asking Judges Wendy Hughes and Francis Legodi to strike the names of three NPA bosses - Jiba, Lawrence Mrwebi and Sibongile Mzinyathi - off the roll of advocates.
The watchdog body is asking in the alternative that the three be suspended from practising as advocates. The decision to launch these proceedings was taken last year following a request by then national director of public prosecutions, Mxolisi Nxasana, who was later replaced by Shaun Abrahams.
Arendse on Monday asked the court to dismiss the application against Jiba. He asked permission to hand in a fourth affidavit - by Jiba - in which she stated why she thought the GCB was gunning for her. But Judge Legodi refused to allow the document.
He said he would give his reasons later, adding the court is “reluctant to get involved in internal political squabbles”. In applying to allow the document, Arendse said there was “some ulterior motive” for this application against his client.
The GCB only lodged the application after it was prompted by the NPA to do so, he said. He questioned an alleged agreement on behalf of the NPA to cover 75% of the GCB’s legal costs for the application. Arendse said Jiba was more than justified to question whether the GCB was acting as custodian of the profession in launching the proceedings or acting on the instructions of “certain factions within the NPA”.
The GCB will later this week present its case to the court. In claiming that Jiba is not fit and proper to hold the office of an advocate, the watchdog is relying on Jiba’s conduct in three high-profile matters, in her capacity as acting national director of public prosecutions.
The GCB mostly based its case on criticism levelled against Jiba, Mrwebi and Mzimyathi in these matters and the way in which they conducted themselves. It pertains to, among others, litigation between the NPA and Freedom Under Law on the decision to drop murder and other charges against suspended crime intelligence boss Richard Mdluli.
In that case an affidavit and heads of arguments were not filed on time and the advice of a senior advocate was ignored. This prompted the judge who heard the matter to describe Jiba, Mrwebi and Mzinyathi’s conduct as unbecoming of persons of such high rank in the public service.
Arendse argued these remarks were taken out of context.
“She acknowledges she has been criticised by the courts, but this does not warrant striking her from the roll of advocates.”
The case for the other two is expected to be presented on Tuesday.
zelda.venter@inl.co.za
Pretoria News