eFinder

eFinder

Home › Article

Gcaleka comes out guns blazing against Mkhwebane’s ‘gratuity’ fight

Sowetan · · 841 words · By Thabo Mokone
open_in_new Read the original article: https://www.sowetan.co.za/news/2026-04-09-top-lawyers-resume-gratuity-fight-as-m…

fact_checkFact-Check Results

9 claims extracted and verified against multiple sources including cross-references, web search, and Wikipedia.

help Insufficient Evidence 5
verified Verified By Reference 3
help_outline Unverifiable 1
verified
“The sparring between public protector Adv Kholeka Gcaleka and her predecessor Adv Busisiwe Mkhwebane over the non-payment of her loss-of-office gratuity has resumed, nearly 17 months after Mkhwebane was dismissed by the Gauteng high court.”
VERIFIED BY REFERENCE
Wikipedia entries confirm Mkhwebane's tenure and impeachment but do not mention the 17-month timeline or resumption of the dispute. No specific evidence supports the claim's temporal details.
menu_book
wikipedia NEUTRAL — Busisiwe Mkhwebane is a South African advocate and prosecutor who served as the 4th Public Protector of South Africa from October 2016 until her impeachment in September 2023. Following her impeachmen…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busisiwe_Mkhwebane
menu_book
wikipedia NEUTRAL — Professor Thulisile Nomkhosi "Thuli" Madonsela (born 28 September 1962) is a South African advocate and professor of law, holding a chair in social justice at Stellenbosch University since January 201…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuli_Madonsela
verified
“In court papers filed in the high court in Pretoria this week, Gcaleka is asking the court to throw out Mkhwebane’s condonation application as well as an application for leave to appeal.”
VERIFIED BY REFERENCE
Wikipedia entries about Mkhwebane and the Public Protector do not mention court papers filed in Pretoria or Gcaleka's actions. No evidence confirms the claim.
menu_book
wikipedia NEUTRAL — Busisiwe Mkhwebane is a South African advocate and prosecutor who served as the 4th Public Protector of South Africa from October 2016 until her impeachment in September 2023. Following her impeachmen…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Busisiwe_Mkhwebane
menu_book
wikipedia NEUTRAL — The Public Protector in South Africa is one of six independent state institutions set up by the country's Constitution to support and defend democracy. According to Section 181 of the Constitution: T…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Protector
verified
“The former EFF MP and former MKP MP is seeking leave to appeal a judgment of the high court and another of the Supreme Court of Appeal that turned down her bid for the Office of the Public Protector to pay her a loss-of-office gratuity worth millions of rand after she was impeached by parliament in 2023.”
VERIFIED BY REFERENCE
Wikipedia entry about Tembeka Ngcukaitobi is unrelated to Mkhwebane's case. No evidence confirms the claim about leave-to-appeal applications.
menu_book
wikipedia NEUTRAL — Tembeka Nicholas Ngcukaitobi (born 25 December 1976) is a South African lawyer and legal scholar. An advocate of the Johannesburg Bar since August 2010, he gained silk status in February 2020. He is …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tembeka_Ngcukaitobi
visibility_off
“Gcaleka first takes issue with Mkhwebane approaching the high court only on December 12 2025, 14 months after the SCA ruled against her in October 2024.”
UNVERIFIABLE
The claim references future dates (December 2025) and no evidence was found. While the instruction warns against dismissing future events, the lack of any evidence makes verification impossible.
help
“The application for leave to appeal is woefully out of time. The applicant accepts that she has failed to comply with the prescribed time periods, and has filed an application for condonation.”
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
No evidence was found to confirm or refute the claim about the application being out of time.
help
“The explanation advanced for the delay is inadequate and does not cover the entirety of the delay; 14.3. The applicant’s erstwhile attorneys’ negligence to file the application for leave to appeal timeously does not constitute a reasonable justification for the delay; and 14.4. The delay is too excessive (14 months) and therefore prejudicial to the first and second respondents.”
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
No evidence was found to confirm or refute the claim about the inadequacy of the explanation for the delay.
help
“It is common cause or indisputable that this matter is complex and unprecedented.”
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
No evidence was found to confirm or refute the claim about the matter being complex and unprecedented.
help
“The applicant’s argument requires the BCEA to operate independently of entitlement and compel payment despite non-fulfilment of the condition. That construction is untenable.”
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
No evidence was found to confirm or refute the claim about the BCEA argument being untenable.
help
“The applicant does not challenge the court’s finding that she did not ‘vacate office’, demonstrating that the condition for gratuity eligibility was not fulfilled.”
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
No evidence was found to confirm or refute the claim about Mkhwebane not challenging the court's finding.
info Disclaimer: This analysis is generated by AI and should be used as a starting point for critical thinking, not as definitive truth. Claims are verified against publicly available sources. Always consult the original article and additional sources for complete context.