Leading Black advocates have come out in support of Advocate Mahlape Sello SC, one of the three independent panellists of the Phala Phala report which found President Cyril Ramaphosa has a case to answer regarding the theft in his home and the stash of money found in his furniture.
The statement by 15 advocates including Vuyani Ngalwana SC, Dali Mpofu SC, Muzi Sikhakhane SC, Lizzy Baloyi SC and Menzi Simelane, among others “noted with great concern, the cruel, gratuitous and seemingly well orchestrated attacks on our colleague Mahlape SC for performing her professional duties as an advocate appointed as part of the panel established in terms of Section 89 of the Constitution”.
Sello came under attack from the pro-Ramaphosa lobby group including media accusing her of being conflicted and biased because she was part of the team that defended former ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule in his 2021 case against the ANC.
In the statement, the advocates said the attacks on Sello show typical double standards applied by certain journalists and “pseudo-legal analysts” who pay fealty to the powerful.
“They appear to emerge from the well-designed echo-chamber whose real agenda is not the rule of law, but the preservation of the interests of certain groups and the protection of leaders they prefer. We reject this double standard because it has no place in a free and democratic South Africa”.
The advocates also criticised Advocate Thuli Madonsela who is among outspoken legal experts supporting Ramaphosa and encouraging the president to take the panel report under review calling it flawed.
“We also call on former Public Protector, Madonsela, who has emerged as an expert in Section 34 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004 to seek guidance from her previous pronouncements on this statute as contained in paragraph 7.2 of her Report of 14 October 2016 entitled ‘State of Capture’.
“What has changed since her previous analysis? The subject of the investigation. If these attacks were a result of some misunderstanding of the role of advocates and the meaning of the cab-rank rule, it would be somewhat understandable.
“However, these ‘journalists’ and ‘analysts’ that are attacking Sello do so knowing full well the role of advocates. They seem prepared to risk their own integrity in order to serve the interests that sustain them.
“We reject the attacks on Sello SC’s person and the suggestion by innuendo that, but for her, the outcome might have been different. This suggestion is a gratuitous insult on former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo and retired Senior Judge Thokozile Masipa.
“We have noted that those in the media who now question Sello’s integrity do so simply because they seek to defend President Ramaphosa in relation to whom the panel has found prima facie (or face value) information for him to answer the allegations levelled against him on Phala Phala.
“Since the panel’s report was made public, there has been a flood of what appears to be a sponsored ‘fight back’ campaign at the expense of independent Senior Counsel rendering an important service to our country.
“We do not seek to comment on the findings of the report at all or the merits or demerits of any pending legal challenges to the report. It is not our place nor would it be appropriate for us to do so.
“We simply condemn the gratuitous attacks on Sello SC and reject as disingenuous the attacks on her integrity and that of her fellow panellists, Justice Ngcobo and retired Judge Masipa.
“Sello, like any advocate in the referral profession, is free to take any brief in respect of which she is not conflicted. It is inappropriate to seek to cast doubt on her integrity by means of fabrications whose sting is a suggestion that by accepting the appointment, she lacks integrity.
“We also note the deafening silence of most professional bodies of advocates (Bars) and indeed the judiciary or the JSC in the face of gratuitous attacks on the panel. It makes one wonder: had these attacks been directed at white and male advocates or judges, would the silence have been as deafening?