MK Party: Accountability cannot be outsourced, O’Sullivan must return to SA

The MK Party has condemned Paul O'Sullivan’s refusal to appear physically before the Ad-hoc Committee investigating allegations made by Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.

This comes after O'Sullivan cited serious security concerns and alleged threats to his life, rejecting claims that he fled South Africa to avoid questioning. He insists he is willing to testify, but only virtually.

O'Sullivan, in a written submission to the committee, confirmed that he was out of the country due to “urgent family business” and would not return until at least the end of February.

While he expressed a willingness to testify virtually, he made it clear that he would not answer questions related to his personal life or events before his emigration to South Africa.

The party criticised O'Sullivan’s decision to remain in London and request a virtual appearance, arguing that it undermines the authority of Parliament and hampers constitutional accountability.

MK Party spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela emphasised that the issue at hand goes beyond logistical convenience.

“This is about accountability,” Ndhlela said.

He accused O'Sullivan of shielding himself from scrutiny by staying abroad. He further argued that this refusal to appear in person prevents Parliament from fulfilling its constitutional duties and undermines the credibility of the investigation.

The MK Party stressed that Parliament and its Ad-hoc Committee are constitutionally mandated to address issues of national importance, and the party dismissed the idea of remote participation as inappropriate.

"Parliament is not a Zoom meeting. The Ad-hoc Committee is not a webinar," Ndlela said.

He also stated that O'Sullivan’s request for a virtual appearance was an insult to Parliament and a slap in the face of South Africans who expect courage, candour, and presence from those who insert themselves into public life.

The MK Party also drew comparisons to the case of former President Jacob Zuma, who appeared before the Zondo Commission and later pursued legal remedies, including a recusal application and judicial review. 

''Despite these legal processes being followed, and with the review outcome still pending, the Constitutional Court of South Africa nonetheless ordered his incarceration for non-appearance.''

The MK Party believes that this episode sets a precedent for uncompromising enforcement of compliance, even when legal remedies are being pursued.

The party has called for parity and consistency in the application of the law. 

“O'Sullivan, by contrast, has not appeared at all and now seeks accommodation from abroad without first submitting himself to the authority of Parliament.

''There can be no justification for extending indulgence to a private individual where even a former Head of State was afforded none,'' said Ndhlela. 

The party has called for the Ad-hoc Committee to issue a subpoena to compel O'Sullivan to appear in person.

''Where voluntary cooperation fails, compulsory processes must follow.''

The MK Party also urged law enforcement agencies and the Government of National Unity to take action.

“If O'Sullivan is serious about his claims, let him demonstrate that seriousness by returning home and subjecting himself to South African processes, on South African soil, before South African representatives, and under South African law,” said Ndhlela. 

He added that all lawful mechanisms should be considered to ensure that no individual is exempt from scrutiny, so that no individual is placed above scrutiny and no one is permitted to game the system from abroad.

''Accountability cannot be outsourced. Justice cannot be meaningfully pursued from self-imposed distance.

''The era of selective transparency, where one accuses loudly but seeks indulgence when called to account, must come to an end.

Ndhlela said South Africans deserve better than grandstanding from afar.

''They deserve the truth, delivered directly and without cowardice. Paul O'Sullivan must return, appear in person, and answer fully. Anything less is contempt dressed up as convenience, and it should be rejected outright.''

hope.ntanzi@iol.co.za 

IOL Politics