PUBLIC PROTECTOR
Should Threaten Protect the Public
I am formally writing to Public Protector Adv. Kholeka Gcaleka demanding that she retract or clearly clarify a disturbing part of her office’s media statement released on 11 May 2026.
After noting “with concern” the public reaction to the recent Constitutional Court judgment, her office defended their Phala Phala report; and then issued this warning:
“The PPSA takes this opportunity to remind members of the public that insulting the Public Protector or the Deputy Public Protector constitutes a criminal offence in terms of section 9(a) of the Public Protector Act.”
“Any person convicted of this offence may be liable… to a fine not exceeding R40,000 or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months, or to both…”
“The right to freedom of expression, guaranteed under section 16 of the Constitution, is not unlimited…”
This feels like a warning shot aimed at ordinary citizens. Right when people are criticising the Public Protector’s report, the office responds by threatening them with jail time.
That is not acceptable.
The Public Protector is a Chapter 9 institution created to protect citizens from powerful people, not to protect itself from those same citizens.
We must be free to question their reports, their reasoning, and their decisions.
Let me be clear:
I am not defending threats, harassment, or obstruction of their work. Those should remain illegal. But robust criticism, strong opinions, satire, and honest disagreement are normal parts of democracy and should never be treated as criminal “insulting”.
We are asking the Public Protector to publicly confirm the following:
1. South Africans have the right to robustly criticise the Public Protector, her office, the Phala Phala report, and all their decisions.
2. Ordinary criticism, media scrutiny, satire and public disagreement are not criminal offences.
3. The criminal warning was not intended to intimidate or silence lawful voices.
4. The office will not use the Public Protector Act to scare us into silence.
5. Any future legal warnings will be accurate and properly referenced.
We have given them until 28 May 2026 to respond properly. If they don’t, I will take this matter, together with your endorsement, to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development in Parliament.
This is not an attack on the office of the Public Protector. It is a defence of our right to hold powerful institutions accountable.
An institution created to protect the public must never speak to the public as if we are the threat.
If you agree, please endorse below.
Join 1,072 South Africans who have already endorsed (12:52 - 14/05/2026)!
By endorsing this letter, you consent to your name, city/town, and province being submitted to Public Protector South Africa and, if necessary, to Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development in support of this request. Your email address is for verification only and will not be published without your consent.
We HATE spam too. Your details are 100% secure.
