Advocate Nasreen Bawa accused of, among other offences, breaching the Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 and the General Council of the Bar of South Africa Uniform Rules of Professional Conduct
Advocate Nasreen Bawa accused of, among other offences, breaching the Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 and the General Council of the Bar of South Africa Uniform Rules of Professional Conduct
A RHODES Must Fall activist recently approached Parliament calling for the recusal of Advocate Nasreen Bawa SC as evidence leader in the parliamentary hearing on Public Protector Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s impeachment proceedings.
Western Cape-based activist Chumani Maxwele, who is the chairperson of the Black People’s National Crisis Committee, has accused Bawa of defeating or obstructing the course of justice, fraud and perjury.
Bawa was also accused of, among other offences, breaching the Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 and the General Council of the Bar of South Africa Uniform Rules of Professional Conduct.
Acting on behalf of Maxwele, Gardee Gordrich Attorneys addressed a letter to Qubudile Dyantyi, the chairperson of the parliamentary inquiry into Mkhwebane’s fitness to hold office and Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula on October 11 requesting that allegations against Bawa attended to.
Bawa had dismissed the allegations saying that she was cleared by the Legal Practice Council (LPC) and Cape Bar Council (CBC).
“I was asked (about the matter), I gave a response when there was an investigation and I was cleared. I had no involvement with the NPA,” said Bawa during an earlier interview with Independent Media.
It was alleged that Bawa interfered with an investigation, involving NPA, into corruption at the Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries. Independent Media is in possession of a copy of the email sent by Bawa.
Both the LPC and the CBC confirmed dismissing complaints that were initially filed by attorney Barnabas Xulu who is directly involved in the matter.
Maxwele said he resuscitated the complaint because the one filed by Xulu with LPC and CBC in June 2020 was not substantively addressed by the two legal entities “on the basis that the complaints fell outside of their respective jurisdictions and as the evidence to substantiate the complaints against Bawa SC was not available at the time”.
“However, as the records pertaining to the misconduct of Bawa SC are now serving before the High Court, are pending criminal investigations, and have been resubmitted to both the Legal Practice Counsel and Cape Bar Counsel for reconsideration.
“On the basis hereof, we are instructed to demand as we herein do, that Bawa SC recuse herself or be removed from the Section 194 Inquiry pending the determination of the organizations seized with determining these matters,” said Gardee Gordrich Attorneys in the letter.
Maxwele said if Bawa is allowed to continue as the evidence leader in the Mkhebane matter, this has the potential to contaminate these proceedings.
“This is more so because these proceedings have been initiated to deal with the conduct of the Public Protector. It, therefore, behoves the National Assembly to ensure that the evidence leader’s conduct is consonant with the constitutional functions and duties of the National Assembly,” read the letter.
United Democratic Movement (UDM) leader Bantu Holomisa had on October 12 also written to Dyantyi calling for the recusal of Bawa based on similar allegations.
“It is the contention of the UDM that the seriousness of the allegations that are leveled against Advocate Bawa SC are such that her fitness as evidence leader is now questionable and her continued role in the Committee may have the unintended consequences of soiling the work of this Committee,” read Holomisa’s letter.
Dyantyi is yet to respond to questions sent to him. He also did not answer the phone call.
