Cape Forum questions appointment of new Director of Public Prosecutions over race

The civil rights organisation Cape Forum is questioning President Cyril Ramaphosa’s decision not to appoint any of the candidates shortlisted for the position of National Director of Public Prosecutions to the position.

While we do not doubt the abilities of Adv Jan Lekgoa (Andy) Mothibi, we find it strange that he was appointed above the six candidates who were on the shortlist to begin with. This while he was never even a candidate being considered. How then did the panel decide that the six candidates were competent enough to be invited for interviews from a longer list of 32 candidates?

It does not escape our notice that after the interview process, allegations were suddenly made by lawyer Barnabas Xulu against Adv Hermione Cronjé. She was widely regarded as a preferred candidate for the position.

These allegations were never tested by the panel, but the allegations began to surface around the same time as the panel was due to hand over their report to President Ramaphosa.

Cape Forum is concerned that race played a role in the outcome of the process – specifically because only one panel member from the minority groups was included. The rest were black Africans. In addition, two of the panel members were representatives of organisations for black lawyers, both strongly ideologically driven, namely the Black Lawyers Association and the National Association of Democratic Lawyers.

Given our country’s history of racial prejudice and the ANC-led government’s emphasis on redress for “black Africans in particular”, we believe that Cronjé has been disqualified because of this. We find this unacceptable. Coloured South Africans, as well as other minority groups, generally have a proven track record of faithful service to the country when appointed to critical government positions.

The President should therefore take the country into his confidence by making the panel’s report public so that we know in what ways Cronjé and the other candidates fell short. He should also explain why he considers Adv Mothibi to be suitable for the position – without having been tested through a public interview process, like the unsuccessful candidates.