Buang Jones has withdrawn from being nominated as commissioner in the SAHRC

In a recent turn of events, former Gauteng head of the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), Buang Jones has pulled out from the race to be considered by the portfolio committee on justice and correctional services for one of the positions of four full-time and two part-time commissioners.

Spokesperson of the justice and correctional services portfolio committee, Rajaa Azzakani, confirmed to City Press that the committee had this week received the letter of complaint about the environment at the SAHRC.

“As indicated, Parliament is currently on constituency period, meaning committee meetings will only resume from October 9. It is only after this that a full committee will be able to discuss the matter. The chairperson cannot comment on the matter until the letter is tabled in the committee meeting and discussed by members. At this stage, the committee cannot confirm if any applications/nominations have been withdrawn,” said Azzakani.

Meanwhile, Jones confirmed to City Press that he had withdrawn:

I decided to withdraw from being considered to focus on entrepreneurial opportunities and to build my legal practice. I don’t believe that the practice of human rights has been internalised or institutionalised by the commission. It has been a singular honour to serve on the commission.
Jones added that the commission needed a reset. City Press understands that Jones was nominated by human rights lawyer in the SAHRC, Shirley Mlombo.

SAHRC commissioners overstep their powers According to the letter, written by Lwethu Yoli, SAHRC legal officer in the Western Cape and former general secretary of the National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers, some of the concerning issues at the commission include the irregular re-employment of staff members.

This involves commissioners who should have no power to appoint or terminate, disregarding the resignation of Advocate Naseema Fakir’s and Lorinda Lynn’s resignations and re-employing them to the head of legal and acting CEO positions, respectively, without following proper governance and recruitment procedure.

“The commissioners give direct instructions to the secretariat provincial managers and some senior staff members, referring acquaintances for their matters to be investigated by officials, deliberately flouting the complaints handling procedure (CHP) which directs how matters get assessed and investigated by provinces,” reads the letter.

The letter further states that members of staff are left in precarious positions, as those who push back against these instructions are then targeted and labelled as troublemakers within the institution.

SAHRC spokesperson Wisani Baloyi told City Press that the commission would take guidance from Parliament on the letter.

Baloyi said:

While this is the first time that the commission has seen the letter, it notes that Parliament is the authority to which the commission accounts. The commission acknowledges that there were a number of human resource issues and challenges that had to be dealt with robustly in the last few months.
He added that, as the commission is accountable to Parliament, they shall await further communication in this regard, at which point the commission will respond to allegations made in the correspondence by the union representative.

Low staff morale and confusion riddle the commission In addition to their other complaints, the staff voiced frustration over the low staff morale because they do not know how to go about executing the mandate of the commission, as every step now unofficially and officially requires commissioner approval.

“The net effect of this has been an increase in cases that are not handled in accordance with the CHP. There is a belief held by commissioners that they have to approve matters, despite the CHP stating that the handling of complaints has to be decided by the respective provincial manager for the office with which the complaint was lodged and the chief operating officer for the commission,” reads the letter.

Stellenbosch University report released without proper evidence The letter further states that the report that found Stellenbosch University (SU) had violated the human rights of Afrikaans-speaking students when it implemented an English-only policy in certain residences during the 2021 welcoming period had deliberately omitted evidence.

“As is written in the SU report, ‘doing so may lead to unnecessary disputes of fact and draw out the process without cause’. If the evidence was put forward in the report, we would avoid any dispute of fact,” reads the letter.

It also points out that the publishing of the SU report indicates that the commissioners are either unaware of the principles of administrative justice or have deliberately acted contrary thereto, failing in its mandate to uphold the law.

Mishandling of former acting CEO misconduct In February, City Press reported that a discriminatory complaint had been levelled by staff managers at former acting CEO, Chantel Kissoon, who allegedly made racist utterances and called the managers black babies.

The union further complained that the commissioner had taken over a week to suspend her, despite the clarity in the employee handbook on the course that should be followed.

“It also took the union’s threat to protest outside the commission’s premises for a staff meeting to be called to engage with staff regarding the racist incident. As a result of how poorly this incident has been handled, the union has taken it up as its responsibility to look after the interests of its members and the public at large, by instituting equality court proceedings against Ms Kisoon in her personal capacity.”

Source: News24