Didiza defends parliamentary legal services amid Mkhwanazi inquiry scrutiny
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has emphasised that she has unequivocal confidence in the professionalism, competence, and integrity of Parliament’s legal advisory services.
Image: Supplied
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has come to the defence of the parliamentary legal services after it came under scrutiny in the Ad Hoc Committee inquiring into the allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
This comes after members of the inquiry were unhappy with remarks made by a member of the legal team that the allegations made by Mkhwanazi were technically not evidence.
The remarks have been used as one of the motivations by some MPs to call for the appointment of an external legal counsel to lead evidence in the inquiry.
On Thursday, Didiza said she noted with concern certain remarks made during proceedings of the Ad Hoc Committee, questioning the competence and integrity of the legal team assigned to support the committee. She said she has unequivocal confidence in the professionalism, competence, and integrity of Parliament’s legal advisory services.
“Parliamentary legal advisers are not merely administrative staff members, they are all highly qualified, admitted legal practitioners, governed by the Legal Practice Act and accountable to professional bodies such as the Legal Practice Council.
“Their work is rooted in principles of ethical conduct, professional responsibility, and the pursuit of justice in support of the constitutional mandate of Parliament.”
In apparent reference to the affected legal team member, Didiza said Parliament was privileged to be served by one of the most experienced and competent legal teams in a wide and diverse array of legal expertise.
She also said the drafting services and advice provided by the parliamentary legal services have passed the test under the most rigorous legal and constitutional scrutiny.
The team has consistently guided the institution with credibility and authority.
“While Members of Parliament may, at times, find certain legal opinions unpalatable or may disagree with them, such opinions are nonetheless based on sound legal reasoning and are always intended to support both committees and the institution as a whole, to act within the framework of the Constitution and the law.”
Didiza added that constructive engagement with legal advice was both natural and welcome in a democratic parliamentary setting.
“However, it is profoundly important to distinguish between debating the merits of advice and launching unjustified personal attacks on the integrity or competence of the legal professionals who provide it.
“To cast aspersions on these officers of the court for how they deliver their legal opinions or for their considered advice is not only unfair and unjust to the individuals concerned, but also poses a serious risk to the credibility of Parliament and the integrity of its processes, including those currently before the Ad Hoc Committee.”
Didiza also said the parliamentary legal services will continue to provide the necessary highest standard, though an external legal counsel will be sought to lead the evidence in the inquiry.
“Even if external advisers were engaged, they too would be entitled to the same respect and decorum expected towards the highly qualified legal team that currently serves the institution,” she added.