President Jacob Zuma could be in for a surprise should the Constitutional Court allow MPs to vote in a secret ballot on a motion of no confidence in him.
Several ANC MPs told The Cape Times’s sister newspaper, The Star, yesterday that moves were afoot by certain ANC politicians to join the opposition in voting for Zuma to vacate office.
This is despite the party ordering its MPs to vote against the opposition motion to oust the president and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa last week, telling Parliament he expected them to vote according to party lines.
MPs said that some ANC leaders were also planning to call for Zuma to resign when the party’s national executive committee (NEC) met next week and avoid being embarrassingly voted out by their own - that is, if the ConCourt ruled in favour of a secret ballot.
It is believed that a decision in favour of the opposition would significantly shift the balance of forces in the ANC and alter the approach towards the motion of no confidence vote and Zuma’s grip on power.
An ANC MP said there was a significant number of MPs who were prepared to vote with the opposition to get rid of the president, as they could no longer defend his administration.
“I can guarantee you that there are more than 50 MPs (from the ANC) who are willing to take him (Zuma) out,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
But an MP supporting Zuma, asked about those who would call for Zuma to resign, said: “That will be ill-discipline.”
Last Thursday some ANC officials, including Gwede Mantashe and his deputy, Jessie Duarte, descended on the caucus to ensure the party line was carried out.
ANC MP Mcebisi Skwatsha said: “Irrespective of what the Concourt says, I’m going to vote according to my party line, there’s no two ways about it.” ANC parliamentary spokesperson Nonceba Mhlauli maintained its position that its MPs would vote according to the prescripts of the organisation.
This was as lawyers representing opposition parties and civil society faced tough questions from the full Bench of the Concourt justices on why the court should force Speaker of the National Assembly Baleka Mbete to allow a secret vote.
Advocate Dali Mpofu, representing the United Democratic Movement, which brought the case, argued that Mbete had the prerogative to decide on whether MPs could vote in secret.“Why is it that the constitution prescribes a secret ballot? To protect the voter against possible intimidation, risk of any threats, of any adverse consequences,” Mpofu argued.
Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng had asked: “How do you prove intimidation?”
Mpofu argued that the Concourt should look at countries like Ghana, Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Korea, whose courts had ruled for a secret ballot. But Justice Mogoeng said those countries' constitutions made provisions for a secret ballot, while the South African one did not.
The judges questioned why the section in the constitution dealing with the vote of no confidence did not specify that the vote should be done by way of secret ballot.
Arguing for the EFF, advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi said Mbete erred when she said she didn’t have the discretion to allow a secret ballot.
Justice Edwin Cameron asked which section of the constitution obliged Mbete to call for a secret vote. Ngcukaitobi said this was because the ANC held a “super majority” in Parliament and there was an “uncontested threat of party discipline” against MPs who failed to follow the party line.
Arguing for Mbete, advocate Marumo Moerane said for parties to bring such a matter on a secret ballot, they would have to prove there was a constitutional obligation that Parliament had not upheld.