Johannesburg - South Africa’s democratic space has shrunk. Exactly by how much, and whether this may yet be reversible, will unfold over the next weeks and months.
The show of force by security operatives in civilian clothes, to evict EFF parliamentarians just before President Jacob Zuma could deliver his State of the Nation address on Thursday, was obvious for everyone to see. So was the state’s own-goal of placing a cellphone-jamming device outside the sitting, thus delaying proceedings amid calls to “bring back the signal” from the media gallery and the opposition benches.
What unfolded in the House provided a rare glimpse into disturbing machinations bubbling beneath the surface. And all indications are that Parliament has surrendered to the Executive and its ever-increasing circle of securocrats.
There have been subtle, but significant shifts. Until last week, the language around the State of the Nation address was one of “hosting the president”. This time round, it turned to “hosting a state event” needing “appropriate security” involving all security agencies.
Parliamentary protection services are usually dressed in lime-green shirts and black trousers, or skirts. On Thursday night, those who moved in to remove the EFF were dressed in white shirts – and their accreditation tags were all marked “high risk”. They appear to be the persons “trained” over two nights in the National Assembly, amid the presence of officers from the public order police, known as the riot police and clearly identifiable by their maroon name tags, and representatives of the presidential protection detail.
By disguising security operatives in civilian clothes, what may have been a legitimate call on protection services turned into a covert security operation.
Among all this emerged the National Joint Operational and Intelligence Structure (Natjoints) which, according to the Communications Department last week, “co-ordinates all security and law enforcement for the president’s annual State of the Nation address”.
Natjoints, a structure without a law or regulation governing its establishment, mandate or budget allocation, was also the co-ordinating structure for the repatriation of the mortal remains of South Africans killed in the Lagos church building collapse, the fight against rhino poaching, the May 2014 elections and shopping mall robberies.
But since at least August 26, 2014, Natjoints has also been involved in developing “stringent security plans” for Parliament and provincial legislatures. National instruction 35 of 2014 demands “weekly risk and threat assessments to direct the weekly operations”, stand-by public order policing and “reaction capability”. Quarterly reports go to the justice, crime prevention and security ministers.
Natjoints brings together the SAPS, State Security Authority (SSA) and the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee (Nicoc). It’s by no means unusual, for various security and other government agencies to come together for specific events, be that an election or the 2010 World Cup. But these co-ordination mechanisms are temporary.
An argument is made, in some security circles, that Natjoints is simply operational and its accountability goes through the political heads of the respective participants. But how can it be ascertained that the correct information is provided to ministers to pass on in response to, say, a parliamentary question to a minister or Promotion of Access to Information Act request?
Oversight over the intelligence services takes place behind parliamentary closed doors, and the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence in the past four years has failed to meet the deadline for its annual report to Parliament.
Less than 24 hours after Thursday’s debacle, the SAPS and SSA, both part of Natjoints, passed the buck to Parliament. That institution’s response was that Secretary to Parliament Gengezi Mgidlana was investigating the jamming and the podium microphone malfunction, while presiding officers would look into the incidents “which led to the eviction of some members”.
The constitution is clear that South Africa’s founding values include “a multiparty system of democratic government to ensure accountability, responsiveness and openness” with the constitution and the rule of law being supreme.
For over a week Parliament’s political and administrative bosses insisted that “no extra-ordinary” measures had been taken. Mgidlana refused to say whether there was any security planning for the scenario of the EFF raising a point of order or privilege. Speaker Baleka Mbete said she didn’t know any details and referred questions to parliamentary protection services boss Zelda Holtzman, who insisted security measures were in line with a high-level state event without saying what these were.
Yet it was clear extra-ordinary measures had been taken. Never before was a State of the Nation address co-chaired by the presiding officers of both Houses. The cellphone jammer was also unprecedented. So were the staggering numbers of uniformed and plain-clothes police in and outside the parliamentary precinct.
It became clear that Mbete had rehearsed, and there was a script as to what to do. But Parliament has yet to adopt its official policy on handling disruptions: four different versions are still before the Parliamentary Oversight Authority (POA), an in-house policy and political decision-making structure.
Mbete still lost it as the EFF raised points of privilege and order – itself not a transgression of anything, even if it was unprecedented. Then Mbete called in first the “parliamentary protection services”, then the “security officers”.
Clause 4 of the 2004 Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act permits security services to enter Parliament “only with the permission and under the authority of the Speaker or the Chairperson”.
Clause 11 allows for the removal of “persons”, although this clause is problematic: the act talks of “persons” and “members”, indicating a difference between, say, a visitor (person) and an elected public representative (member).
Questions remain whether Mbete actually made a ruling on the EFF’s specific points as she must. What is clear is that she had not identified for eviction, as rules require, any EFF MPs beyond Julius Malema, Floyd Shivambu and Mbuyiseni Ndlozi. Yet when the white-shirted operatives moved in, they kicked out all EFF parliamentarians. As Mbete fell silent, National Council of Provinces chairwoman Thandi Modise took charge, but declined to say who the white-shirted security operatives were.
The deployment of unidentifiable security operatives is deeply troublesome.
Communications regulator Icasa’s statement that only the security cluster may use cellphone jammers has highlighted the likely involvement of SSA. The spotlight has already fallen on State Security Minister David Mahlobo who, after receiving a note, left the Chamber and following his return the cellphone signal was back.
Whether Parliament’s political and administrative bosses knew or not, participated in the planning or not, what unfolded on Thursday showed up security, the remit of the Executive, in Parliament. The lines between the separate spheres making up the state have been blurred.
Parliament is not only the national legislature, but also a forum for national debate and holding the Executive accountable. It would be naive to think it was apolitical, but previously attempts were made to try resolve differences in in-house structures like the POA and the chief whips’ forum. Today these mechanisms appear fractured amid hardening attitudes from within the governing ANC that majority numbers equal democracy – despite constitutional provisions that parliamentary minority parties must be able to participate “in a manner consistent with democracy”.
Any attempt to argue that points of order, filibusters or walk-outs damage the dignity of Parliament pale in comparison to the heavy-handed, orchestrated security displayed on Thursday. Hard questions must be asked, and answers obtained, so Parliament can reclaim its space in the country’s constitutional democracy. Otherwise, the democratic space damaged on Thursday will not be restored.
Political Bureau