The two organisations seek urgent interim relief interdicting Ntlemeza from exercising any power pending a review seeking to set aside his appointment.Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF) director Francis Antonie said in his founding affidavit in the application that police minister Nkosinathi Nhleko did not take all relevant factors into account when appointing Ntlemeza.Antonie said this became clear after the HSF received a letter from Nhleko on March 2 detailing why Ntlemeza was appointed.Antonie said Ntlemeza was appointed head of the Hawks in September last year after he had been acting in that position since December 2014 when his predecessor Anwa Dramat was suspended.Antonie said the decision to suspend Dramat and the appointment of Ntlemeza as acting head had been successfully challenged by the HSF.“Ntlemeza‚ however‚ never left office and‚ for whatever reason‚ the decision of this court in the … matter was never implemented‚” Antonie said.He said Ntlemeza was appointed despite scathing judgments against him which related to the unlawful suspension by Ntlemeza of Gauteng Hawks head Maj-Gen Shadrack Sibiya.In one of the judgments‚ Judge Elias Matojane stated that Ntlemeza was “biased and dishonest” and “lacked integrity and honour” as Ntlemeza had made false statements under oath.The judge also remarked that Ntlemeza had a “contemptuous attitude towards the rule of law and the principle of legality and transparency”.Antonie said Nhleko‚ in making a decision to appoint Ntlemeza‚ failed to take into account all relevant factors‚ most notably judicial pronouncements in the Sibiya judgments that cast serious doubt on the fitness and the propriety of Ntlemeza to hold office.In its heads of argument filed on Monday‚ the organisations said its application concerned a ministerial appointment to a high office of state of a person who had been found by the high court to have acted without integrity and honesty.“The office of the National Head is critical to law enforcement. It is simply not tenable for any person who is unfit to qualify for this office and/or whose appointment is placed in serious question to continue to occupy that office‚ particularly when that person's integrity‚ and his ability to fulfil the objective constitutional requirement of fitness‚ propriety and conscientiousness have been found by a Court to be wanting‚” the organisation’s counsel‚ David Unterhalter SC and Carol Steinberg‚ said in their heads of argument.Counsel for the minister of police‚ William Mokhari SC‚ submitted in his heads of argument that the organisations were aware‚ when Ntlemeza was appointed‚ of the judicial pronouncements upon which they put reliance that Ntlemeza was not a fit and proper person to hold office.Mokhari said upon Ntlemeza’s appointment in September‚ the organisations did not approach the court on an urgent basis to challenge the appointment.He said on the organisations’ own version‚ the application could not be treated as an urgent one.Mokhari said having regard to the principle of separation of powers‚ it was not for the court to determine through a judicial process the fitness or otherwise of Ntlemeza to hold the office of the national head of the Hawks.It was Parliament that had the power to initiate and to suspend the national head if there were grounds to do so‚ he said.Advocates for Ntlemeza said the application was not urgent“To the extent premised on the Sibiya judgments‚ this application should still have been brought several months earlier‚” Pule Seleka and Reghana Tulk said in their submissions...