Mbeki’s lawyers claim Khampepe failed to outline recommendations on TRC prosecutions

Former President Thabo Mbeki’s lawyers have told the Johannesburg High Court that Justice Sisi Khampepe has failed to outline her recommendations on the prosecution of cases referred by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) when she was Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions.

Mbeki and former President Jacob Zuma are seeking Khampepe’s removal as chair of the commission probing apartheid-era cases referred by the TRC.

They argue her failure to disclose the full extent of her role at the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) creates a reasonable apprehension of bias.

ALSO READ:

Mpofu asks court to declare Justice Khampepe's refusal to recuse herself invalid

Zuma’s counsel accuses TRC inquiry chair Khampepe of gross misconduct

Mbeki’s lawyer, Advocate Ngwako Maenetje, argued that the central issue in the recusal application is not speculation about bias, but concerns about non-disclosure and, in some cases, what he termed “half disclosures”.

Maenetje said that while Khampepe’s rulings during her time at the TRC are publicly available, her activities in the NPA, including whether she advised her superior while serving as second in command on TRC cases, are not part of the public record.

He added that Justice Khampepe previously denied amnesty to 37 African National Congress (ANC) leaders, and now one of them is expected to testify before her.

Maenetje argued the duty to disclose rests with the presiding officer, especially one as senior as Judge Khampepe.

“She doesn't, even today, doesn't take the court into her confidence, didn't take her colleagues on the commission into her confidence about what precisely she was doing in the NPA related to TRC cases in 1998-99.”

KHAMPEPE ACTED IRRATIONALLY

Lawyers representing Zuma have told the Johannesburg High Court that Khampepe acted irrationally when dismissing her recusal application on the basis of alleged delays.

Advocate Dali Mpofu argued before a full bench that the commission exaggerated timelines, after claiming Zuma delayed for eight months before bringing a recusal application.

“It was illegal and reasonable and irrational for the commissioner, knowing what she knows, having been the one who granted us the extension, being the one who granted us the directives, and we acted accordingly to her directives, to suddenly say, oh no, but you had nine months or eight months or whatever. It is just nobody who has read these papers can come to that conclusion.”

The hearing continues on Tuesday.