Are you confident you'll have an agreed list in time for the elections?
Yes, the list has been agreed by the NEC [national executive committee]. But because of the outcry . the whole list in its entirety has been referred to the integrity commission.
Will its recommendations be binding?
Yes . So you'll be asked to step down or opt out or resign.
And that won't have to be passed by the NEC?
No. What the NEC requested is that natural justice must be applied. The integrity commission must call in a member or a candidate to come and be answerable.
And no matter who it is, the recommendation will be binding?
Yes, it will be binding.
What if someone refuses to go?
You can't refuse to go because then you are undermining the NEC decision and obstructing the functioning of the organisation.
Have you set a deadline?
No, they're communicating with the secretary-general. But the names have been forwarded to the chairman of the integrity commission.
He's complained that the commission's powers are limited.
It is up to them to do their own investigation of people implicated in commissions [of inquiry] or chapter 9 institutions.
There's not much time, is there?
No, it will have to be done before May 8.
Why didn't you submit the list to the integrity committee before sending it to the IEC?
The list that was submitted to the IEC was vetted in line with the constitution and the Electoral Act.
Should the vetting have been stronger?
No, it was just vetting compliance with the law, it was not vetting issues of integrity or morality.
Was that a mistake?
It was not. We have now invoked the processes of the integrity commission and it has to do its work. We don't regret any processes that we've undertaken. There's no ifs or buts.
But you're now three weeks past the IEC deadline and your list hasn't been finalised?
I'm not in court. I want to cooperate with you but you're making my work very difficult.
Did you anticipate this pushback from your constituencies?
Obviously it was there. South Africans don't want corruption, they don't want people who are likely to be corrupt once they're in public office. I think that is clear. It was always the case.
And you've always listened to those voices?
We must listen to those voices because those voices are voters.
So why were people implicated in corruption put on your list?
Implication of any individual in a commission does not equate to guilt.
But now they can be excluded without being found guilty?
That is the requirement in terms of our legal system. But as part of our internal measures to ensure . integrity, we have referred all the names to the integrity commission.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.