Nkandla ‘scapegoats’ to appeal media’s access to misconduct hearings

The 11 public works officials facing disciplinary charges in connection with the R246 million upgrades to the president’s Nkandla home will appeal a court decision that granted the media access to the hearings. 

Claude Naiker, spokesperson for the Public Servants Association, which is representing the 11 officials nicknamed the Nkandla “scapegoats”, confirmed today that the appeal would go ahead after the officials consulted their lawyers this week. 

Naiker said that they had studied the Pietermaritzburg High Court’s judgment and believed there were grounds for appeal because “not much is said about the rights of workers”. 

“There is a lot said about public interest, but what about the workers’ interests and the employment relationship?” 

Naiker referred to the murder trial of Paralympian Oscar Pistorius, to which the media had access, and said there was concern that access would prejudice its members. 

The department had insisted that the cases were conducted individually instead of collectively, he said. The charges brought against the officials were almost identical so if they were held in the public domain, the evidence given in one hearing could influence the next case. 

Naiker added that the media would still have access to the union for information. 

“This is about workers’ rights, which need to be protected.” 

The senior officials face charges of procurement misconduct, project management misconduct, and supply chain management violations. 

The individual hearings got under way in October 2014, but were put on hold pending the outcome of an application for media access lodged in the high court by Media24, Times Media Group and the Mail & Guardian. 

This follows after Police Minister Nathi Nhleko said in an answer to a question in Parliament that the architect who was responsible for the multimillion-rand expansion would not be criminally investigated. 

The National Prosecuting Authority also announced that it would not be pursuing the three other cases brought against the directors-general of the department of public works.