Parliament - In a bizarre statement, the National Assembly on Monday argued that the SAPS officials in the House effectively became “staff members of Parliament” – even though they remained on the SAPS payroll.
It was justifying the secondment of active policemen into its parliamentary protection services to boost its capacity to deal with unruly MPs.
Dismissing opposition parties’ claim that such a move breached the separation of powers (SAPS members are part of the executive, a separate sphere to the legislature), Parliament said: “Any seconded officials will work under the direct authority of the executive authority (the presiding officers) and be directed by the accounting officer (the secretary to Parliament).
“This means that officials seconded to the institution effectively become staff members of Parliament.”
While the national legislature said the move didn’t contravene the separation of powers, it acknowledged consulting the executive on boosting the capacity of its parliamentary protection services.
“In undertaking this task we are engaging with our counterparts in the executive for advice, support and partnership as part of the organs of the state which are independent of each other, but which are interrelated and operating with the necessary checks and balances,” Parliament said.
The controversial secondment of 22 policemen emerged at the weekend when City Press reported that Parliament had briefed the SAPS members last Friday and bought them the uniform of parliamentary protection services – lime green shirts and black pants.
However, Parliament said on Monday that it “did not enlist the SAPS to perform any security function in the chamber. This means that the SAPS’s uniformed police are not going to be enlisted as the first line of engagement unless there is a threat to life and/or a criminal act is taking place.”
Outrage erupted at February’s State of the Nation Address when police dressed as waiters in white shirts forcibly evicted EFF MPs, some of whom had raised points of order in an unprecedented move on such an occasion.
It emerged that at least some of those dressed like waiters belonged to the SAPS’s public order policing unit, colloquially known as the riot police.
Several parties opposed using police as part of the parliamentary protection services.
A recent Western Cape High Court ruling outlawed the SAPS from the chamber, and last week, MPs revising the rules decided that the SAPS could enter the chamber only if there were at threat to life or damage to property. However, MPs across party-political lines agreed the police would be responsible for the public gallery, and could take over just outside the doors to the House to escort expelled unruly MPs from the precinct.
The rules committee was to meet again on Tuesday to make a final decision on this in the wake of repeated disruptions of sittings in the past 14 months. If approved, the revised rules are scheduled for adoption in the House on Thursday.
Parliament said the aim of the secondment of policemen was to boost the capacity of its parliamentary protection services with immediate effect.
Political Bureau