Robert McBride under fire from MPs for SSA role secrecy and inappropriate gestures
Former IPID head Robert McBride faces intense scrutiny from MPs during a parliamentary hearing, as he refuses to disclose his current employment and is called out for inappropriate gestures.
Image: Armand Hough / Independent Newspapers
THE public hearing of the parliamentary Ad Hoc Committee, investigating allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, began on a contentious note on Tuesday.
Former head of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), Robert McBride, faced significant criticism for refusing to disclose his current employment status.
As McBride testified, he came under fire for making gestures towards MPs during the inquiry. His reluctance to reveal his employment details raised eyebrows among committee members.
"I am not allowed to say what my employment is," McBride stated when pressed about his current role, although he did confirm that he is working within the intelligence services.
During the session, McBride acknowledged that the CV he was using to lead his testimony was outdated. This revelation prompted ActionSA MP Dereleen James to express her concern, questioning the validity of the information presented. "That means we have a falsified statement. We can’t continue as if it is acceptable," James asserted.
MK Party MP David Skosana insisted that McBride clarify his employment situation, stating, "It can’t be a secret." In response, McBride indicated that he could disclose this information only if granted permission by his principals. "I raised this issue with the evidence leader. I thought it was taken care of. I think most people know where I work," he added.
When asked by Ad Hoc Committee chairperson Soviet Lekganyane if any law prevented him from disclosing his employment, McBride cited Act 39 of 1994. However, ANC MP Xola Nqola challenged his interpretation, saying, "I don’t know why this information should be withheld. You can even Google where he is employed."
Nqola further urged McBride to refrain from making gestures while MPs were speaking. "He is doing funny gestures of laughing when somebody is talking. If he wants us to have a good day, he must refrain from that," Nqola remarked.
As McBride attempted to respond, Lekganyane requested to guide him, ensuring he understood what he was responding to. In support of Nqola's concerns, MK Party MP Sibonelo Nomvalo stated, "We made similar observations. We must maintain the decorum. We are not being funny. We are here to work as MPs." He added that McBride's facial expressions during the proceedings were inappropriate.
Nomvalo also accused McBride of submitting an incorrect CV, asserting that he needed no legal advice to prepare a correct one. "The excuse the witness is giving here is invalid. He only tells us now when it is picked up by one of the members. We were made to read a wrong document," he stated.
"What the witness did must be condemned with the contempt it deserves. It is wrong," Nomvalo concluded.
McBride later explained that the law preventing him from disclosing his employment was the National Strategic Intelligence Act of 1994, indicating that the prohibition was included in the regulations. DA MP Ian Cameron pointed out that the Intelligence Services Act of 2002 prohibits disclosure for confidentiality and identity purposes.
James found it peculiar that McBride could not state his current employment, especially since his appointment as director of the foreign branch at the State Security Agency (SSA) had been publicly announced. "Why could he not answer that simple question?" she asked.
In his defence, McBride insisted that he had volunteered the information, stating that the CV was old and that nothing had been falsified. "I did not leave out anything when speaking to evidence leaders," he asserted.
He later confirmed his appointment as head of the foreign branch of the SSA from July 2020, saying, "I indicated my dilemma to mention where I work."
However, EFF MP Leigh-Ann Mathys accused McBride of indifference, questioning his demeanour during the testimony. "He is giving us the same Mary de Haas vibes. Can we be taken seriously as a country?" Mathys remarked.
Lekganyane clarified that it was not their intention to cast aspersions on McBride’s CV. "As we engage, there are observations we make and will try to raise them with you in a manner reasonable to you so that when you leave you must feel part of this country," he said. "You must prove to us that you can be a credible witness before this committee. We request transparency from you. If you can be transparent without being naked, you are to help us," he added.
Earlier in the session, Lekganyane reprimanded McBride for arriving after the hearing's start time. McBride explained that he had been waiting in the consultation room since 9 am. "My apology, I was expecting to be called and saw there was a discussion taking place," he said.