The public protector cannot fulfil the constitutional requirements of her office if other organs of state are allowed to second-guess her and ignore her recommendations. This pronouncement was part of a judgment handed down by the Supreme Court of Appeal when it ordered the suspension of SABC boss Hlaudi Motsoeneng pending a disciplinary inquiry into his conduct in the light of Thuli Madonsela's finding that he had lied about having a matric and had irregularly awarded himself a huge salary increase.The judgment has implications that go far beyond Auckland Park.The upshot of the appeal court's finding is clear: no government department or political office-bearer may continue to blithely ignore Madonsela's findings, or conduct their own, parallel, investigations.Only a judicial review can overrule the public protector, the court said.The ANC has resorted to linguistic gymnastics, personal attacks on Madonsela and its own ''investigations'' to protect President Jacob Zuma from having to comply with her recommendation that he repay some of the millions of rands of public money squandered on his personal mansion.As a result of the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment, Zuma or the ANC will have to ask the courts to overturn Madonsela's finding that he and his family benefited unduly from the R246-million ''security upgrading'' of Nkandla.Unless of course, the Constitutional Court, which is hearing an application by the EFF to have Madonsela's ruling enforced, comes to a different conclusion about whether the public protector's findings are binding.It might make short-term political sense for the ANC or Zuma to try for a judicial review - who knows, they might even be able to drag the matter out until he is no longer in office. But such a tactic will backfire in the long run.Zuma would undoubtedly lose face if he decided to reimburse taxpayers for the excesses of Nkandla, but South Africa - and the ANC - would be the big winners...