Publications
Partners
Suspended head of Parliament security Zelda Holtzman was acquitted of 11 of the 14 charges brought against her by the institution, with the most serious guilty verdict being for failure to develop a strategic plan or business plan for Parliament. This is detailed in an 81-page document about the inquiry into Holtzman.
When Parliament suspended Holtzman and her deputy, Motlatsi Mokgatla, on full pay in July last year, it said they were being investigated for alleged security breaches and issues affecting Parliament’s protection services. But this week it emerged that Holtzman was only found guilty of a failure to develop a business plan, not adequately responding to questions from her superior about secretary to Parliament Gengezi Mgidlana’s use of blue lights and a failure to address divisions among staff in her unit.
The use of blue lights by Mgidlana and the recruitment of active police officers into Parliament security were key points of tension between Mgidlana, Holtzman and Mokgatla and, according to several documents – including court papers City Press has seen – the two security heads objected to Mgidlana’s use of blue lights, saying it was not the duty of Parliament’s protection services to drive him around.
In a memorandum, they questioned the process Parliament followed in recruiting police to become part of its protection unit and the appointment of a subordinate, Deon van der Spuy, to manage the project to improve security in Parliament, which included the recruitment of police. They raised dissatisfactions about being sidelined by Mgidlana, saying this was a result of their “refusal to be forced to carry out functions where the legal basis of those actions is questionable”.
The duo recommended that, among other things, Mgidlana rescind the appointment of the junior official as project manager and that the alleged use of blue lights and sirens in the vehicles used to transport Mgidlana be fully and independently investigated to prevent a recurrence of unlawful behaviour and actions.
In turn, Mgidlana instructed his deputy, Baby Tyawa, to investigate whether it was true that protection services personnel were not supposed to drive him. In investigating the matter, Tyawa sent Holtzman questions about her assertion that it was not her staff’s duty to drive Mgidlana. The inquiry found that Holtzman failed to provide adequate written responses to these questions despite being given several chances to respond. She was found guilty for gross insubordination for this.
A week after they handed in the memorandum, they were suspended from Parliament.
As for being found guilty of a failure to develop a strategic or business plan for Parliament, Holtzman testified that she did not know what a business plan was and was never requested to develop one. The inquiry found her guilty on the basis that she had developed a business plan in previous financial years.
Among the charges Holtzman was exonerated on were those for speaking to the media after her suspension without getting permission from Mgidlana; telling Sunday newspapers that Parliament’s actions against her were “reminiscent of the apartheid government”; and preventing her superior from participating in a meeting with protection services staff. Parliament argued her media comments had tainted its image and brought its name into disrepute.
On June 29, lawyers will argue in mitigation and aggravation of sentence.
