Publications
Partners
The advocate chairing suspended South Africa Revenue Service commissioner Tom Moyane’s disciplinary inquiry has dismissed all his demands.
Advocate Azhar Bham in a 43-page ruling, dated July 31, of which City Press has a copy, said that “each of the grounds of complaint is dismissed”.
“In the light of my ruling, I further direct that Mr Moyane deliver this substantive response to the charges against him [without dictating the form of such response] by Monday, August 20 2018. I shall thereafter convene a further procedural hearing between the parties [to be held during the week of 20 August 2018] to deal with such steps as may be needed to be taken to facilitate the hearing of the disciplinary inquiry as soon as possible.
“Subject to it being logistically possible and suitable to the parties, I invite the parties to consider dates between September 17 and 28 for the hearing of the disciplinary proceedings,” Bham added.
READ: Moyane wants Ramaphosa, Gordhan grilled at his disciplinary
Moyane was appointed Sars commissioner on November 27 2014 by former president Jacob Zuma and was suspended by President Cyril Ramaphosa on March 19 2018.
In late June, Moyane filed the following objections with Bham:
- The procedure prescribed in the terms of reference and the charge sheet, respectively, is unlawful, unfair, unconstitutional and manifestly oppressive in that it automatically excludes oral and/or provides for the leading of any oral evidence only as an exception and subject to the discretion of the chairman. Oral evidence is the norm, as is the case in any fair disciplinary process.
The affidavit filed on behalf of Ramaphosa:
- Is deposed to by Pravin Gordhan, who is the minister of public enterprises, who is, according to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the applicable regulatory framework, not empowered and/or authorised to do so;
- For the reasons above Gordhan’s affidavit is inadmissible and/or irrelevant;
- It purports to rely on the evidence of unnamed National Treasury officials “who had knowledge of the relevant events and custody of the relevant documents”, whose confirmatory affidavits are promised but not delivered to date;
- Is vague and embarrassing in that it lacks the necessary averments to link it in any manner to the central issue of the alleged loss of confidence in the Sars commissioner.
- Purports to rely on documentation which would, in all the circumstances, be in the lawful possession of Gordhan, as he is not the minister of finance.
- The issues which arise and are disputed in these proceedings are apparently and invariably at the core of a separate process instituted by the same president, namely the ongoing commission of inquiry into tax administration and governance by Sars. It is unfair to subject the commissioner, directly or indirectly, to two separate and parallel processes concerning the same subject matter.
