Justice Minister Michael Masutha on Friday dismissed criticism that he and President Jacob Zuma had failed to act when claims about the conduct of Nomgcobo Jiba and Lawrence Mrwebi were first raised. Instead‚ Masutha told Radio 702‚ he wanted top avoid a “cluttering of different legal processes” as their conduct was being dealt with in other “processes that had already been initiated”‚ which included a Western Cape High Court application by the Democratic Alliance.Director of Public Prosecutions Nomgcobo Jiba and Specialised Commercial Crime Unit head Mrwebi were struck from the roll of advocates on Thursday‚ following an application by the General Council of the Bar of South Africa (GCB).The GCB applied for their removal because of scathing criticism in different judgments on how Jiba and Mrwebi conducted litigation on behalf of the prosecuting authority in three politically sensitive cases.Before Masutha came on air‚ former head of the National Prosecution Authority (NPA) Mxolisi Nxasana told the station that he was the complainant behind the GCB application‚ which he said he had approached after Zuma and Masutha failed to act.“When I established that there were these criticisms by the courts about the persons involved (Jiba and Mrwebi)‚ I took necessary steps to engage with the president and the minister because I felt that their conduct was unbecoming of officers of the court‚” said Nxasana.Their response‚ Nxasana claimed‚ was that he was given an “undertaking” that they would “deal with my matter first”‚ said Nxasana‚ a reference to an inquiry called for by Zuma into Nxasana’s own " fitness to continue to hold such office".Nxasana said the president and Masutha “reneged on this undertaking”‚ and when he saw that there “was no willingness from their part to deal with” Jiba and Mrwebi‚ he approached the GCB.The inquiry into Nxasana was dropped and he was given a golden handshake in May last yearMasutha denied there was a hands-off approach with “Jiba and Mrwebi”‚ saying: “I was never under the impression that any person was untouchable”‚ and took a swipe at Nxasana‚ saying their conduct had happened under his watch.Masutha it was unnecessary for him to institute an inquiry as “we had been advised‚ albeit informally‚ that certain criminal proceedings were either pending or due to be initiated” as well as the GCB inquiry”‚ and this would lead to a duplication of effort...