Oppenheimer aviation battle costs Gigaba more than R800K

Source: Timeslive, 20/04/2018

The Department of Home Affairs has to date spent R874‚199 on legal
costs pertaining to Home Affairs Minister Malusi Gigaba’s defence of
his decision in the Fireblade Aviation matter.
This was confirmed on Thursday in a written reply by Gigaba to a
parliamentary question by DA chief whip John Steenhuisen.
The case concerned Gigaba’s decision to overturn approval for the
Oppenheimer-owned Fireblade Aviation to operate a private customs and
immigration service at OR Tambo International Airport.
A judge found the minister to have lied to the court. He lost his
appeal to a full bench of the high court‚ as well as his appeal to the
Supreme Court of Appeal‚ and has decided to take the matter to the
Constitutional Court.
Steenhuisen said it was “absolutely unacceptable” that Gigaba’s
involvement in the Fireblade Aviation matter would continue to incur
legal fees “as he attempts to overturn the damning findings of the high
court‚ which concluded that the minister lied under oath and violated
the Constitution.
“The amount of legal costs incurred by the Department of Home Affairs
to protect a constitutional delinquent will only continue to escalate
as he needlessly pursues this matter at the expense of taxpayers.
“It is simply not enough for President Cyril Ramaphosa to
express ‘great concern’ or ‘give serious attention’ to Gigaba’s
unlawful conduct. The damning findings and escalating legal costs
demand that the president immediately intervene and take action against
the minister.”
Steenhuisen has laid a formal complaint with Public Protector Busisiwe
Mkhwebane‚ requesting that she investigate Gigaba’s conduct in the
light of the judgment to determine whether he had contravened the
Executive Members’ Ethics Act and the ethics code.
Mkhwebane has informed Ramaphosa her investigation will take longer
than the stipulated one month.
Steenhuisen has criticised the delay‚ saying this should be an open and
shut case.
But Oupa Segalwe‚ acting spokesman for the public protector‚ said the
court found that Gigaba told “untruths under oath”‚ not that he
breached the executive code of ethics. The public protector would have
to determine whether his conduct was a breach of the code.