Mogomotsi Mogodiri
Pretoria - The choice of leadership will make or break the ANC leading up to, at and beyond its upcoming national conference.
The past few days have seen dramatic events that have profoundly affected our political landscape.
In an unprecedented move, the Section 89 panel tasked by Parliament to determine if President Cyril Ramaphosa has violated the Constitution found that, on the face of it, the president may have violated the provisions of the Constitution in a number of instances regarding the theft of US dollars at his Phala Phala farm.
Since then, the spin machines have been on overdrive to obfuscate the issues, with dirty tricks campaigns aimed at scandalising and delegitimising former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo and Advocate Mahlape Sello SC.
The decision by the ANC NEC to instruct MPs belonging to the organisation how to vote has confirmed that our country has entered uncharted and treacherous territory of a lack of principles and moral fortitude.
It is no longer about values, ethics, respect for the rule of law, and defence of the Constitution. It is simply about self-preservation and self enrichment, irrespective of how that causes incalculable damage to Brand ANC and steals our country’s future. How infuriating that crime is no longer about the deed itself, but rather who is accused, as we see its definition changing depending on who is allegedly involved.
Crime is crime irrespective of who is allegedly involved or implicated. The ANC’s response becomes even more bizarre given that former president Thabo Mbeki threw down the gauntlet to the leadership with his now-famous question: “What if the panel say that the president has a case to answer?”
Instead of engaging him rationally and sensibly, Mbeki was subjected to ridicule and insults. With the release of the Section 89 panel report, the chickens have come home to roost. The ANC has mismanaged the issue at great cost to its reputation.
This then bring us to the hullabaloo raging on regarding the Section 89 panel. The noise seems to be based on a serious misunderstanding of the law and the terms of reference of the panel. What does Section 89 say?
Under the heading: Removal of President, the section says that “the National Assembly, by a resolution adopted with a supporting vote of at least two-thirds of its members, may remove the president from office only on the grounds of:
(a) A serious violation of the Constitution or the law.
(b) Serious misconduct.
(c) Inability to perform the functions of office.
This is the basis on which the independent panel was appointed. Nowhere in Section 89 is crime mentioned or the determination of guilt by the courts. The Constitution refers only to serious violation of the Constitution and law.
It is also worth mentioning that the panel is restricted to perusing written submissions, and no oral evidence.
It is therefore mischievous of anyone to be arguing that the president was not afforded the opportunity to present his side of the story or his version. Indeed, he was, as per the rule. He submitted a multiple page response to the allegations leveled against him. The panel could not have called him for oral evidence.
The panel didn’t also find guilt. It only said that there was prima facie evidence that the president may have violated the Constitution. This is not a determination of guilt.
Therefore, the process has to be left to Parliament to debate and then adopt to reject the panel’s report on rational and reasonable grounds. It doesn’t makes sense that people are jumping the gun to either instruct their MPs to vote against the report or take it on review.
Now that the session of Parliament to debate the panel’s report has been postponed, I hope that sanity will prevail and the ANC will review its irrational decision. Anything else would inculcate a culture of acting with impunity.
Pretoria News