Didn't you want an ad hoc committee inquiry?
I recommended that [it] should be considered by the speaker.
Why did the ANC members of your committee disagree?
They voted against referring the matter back to the speaker.
Why?
They said we should not abdicate our responsibility.
Your chief whip and Luthuli House accused you of supporting a witch hunt ...
They said the opposition party was engaged in a witch hunt.
Do you agree?
It is not only a witch hunt but an unprocedural way of dealing with the matter.
So you've done an about-turn?
It's not an about-turn. I was not dealing with the merits before. Now I am.
You said your committee would be conflicted. Why did you change?
It's a non-issue now.
Because your chief whip and Luthuli House berated you?
No, because once the matter of the forum was settled I applied my mind to the merits of the case.
Not because they voiced their displeasure?
No. We raise issues for consideration. The position we take at the beginning is not necessarily the position that we end with. That's the essence of debate.
Did you and the ANC MPs take instructions from the party?
No. They went for a five-minute caucus, they came back and argued their case and the matter was put to a vote. It was their decision.
After caucusing outside?
Yes.
To get instructions?
Not at all. They didn't phone anybody. They engaged with the matter.
How united are they on this?
The majority position prevails.
Is ANC infighting undermining the oversight work of parliament?
I'm not aware of infighting. I'm aware of contestation. Contestation is good for any democratic party.
Is toeing the party line more important than holding officials to account?
No. You engage until the majority prevails. Then you must respect that.
How can an ad hoc inquiry into whether the public protector was acting unconstitutionally be a witch hunt?
All Chapter9 institutions are entitled to take remedial action.
To give orders to parliament?
Anyone who is aggrieved by the remedial action is entitled to go to the courts.
Were you aggrieved at being ordered by the public protector?
That's why the speaker and myself challenged that before the court.
What did the court find?
That it was beyond her powers to order us to amend the constitution.
If she doesn't understand the limits of her power doesn't this mean she is not fit for the job?
No, it can be an error of judgment...