Parliament - The ANC on Friday said next week’s debate on an impeachment motion against President Jacob Zuma was an opposition folly based on a misreading of court orders and the Constitution.
“It is not based on section 89 of the Constitution because the President can only be removed on the basis that he violated the law,” said Moloto Mothapo, spokesman for ANC chief whip Stone Sizani.
He argued that the Pretoria High Court ruling regarding Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir’s escape from arrest in South Africa, nowhere impugned Zuma directly.
“Firstly, there is no final outcome because the matter is being taken on review, secondly, both orders of the court do not refer to the president directly. It is not his conduct that is on trial,” he added.
The DA brought a motion for impeachment against Zuma on August 4, arguing that as head of the executive he had breached the law and the Constitution by allowing his Sudanese counterpart to leave the country in violation of a court order handed down by Judge Hans Fabricius in the high court in Pretoria in mid-June.
A full bench of the high court in a subsequent ruling said it was of concern that the government had defied the order, with Judge President Dunstan Mlambo adding that government’s conduct in failing to arrest al-Bashir was inconsistent with the South African Constitution.
The DA is basing its motion on the argument that Zuma, as head of the executive, carries the responsibility for this.
Al-Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity stemming from the conflict in Darfur.
Speaker Baleka Mbete initially refused to schedule a debate on the motion because government is appealing the high court ruling. However after an exchange of lawyers’ letters this week, she was advised to allow it in terms of section 102 of the Constitution.
The debate was set down for this coming Tuesday.
In terms of section 89 of the Constitution, a two-thirds majority vote in the National Assembly is needed to remove the president. The DA and the ANC are at odds over the percentage needed to force the Speaker to set up an ad hoc committee to consider the possibility.
DA chief whip John Steenhuisen was adamant on Friday that this required the support of only one third of MPs to pass.
Mothapo disagreed, saying: “There is no way that a decision as important as setting up an ad hoc committee to consider impeaching the president can be taken by a minority vote.”
Section 53 (1) (b) of the Constitution confirms the DA’s view, meaning the votes of 134 members of the National Assembly will be enough to resolve to force the establishment of such a committee. Steenhuisen said it was therefore within reach.
But the ANC insisted the motion was a pointless exercise, saying the DA had been warned that the facts of the al-Bashir case did not form a sound basis for its motion.
“Therefore without any sound legal or constitutional basis to justify the motion, the debate becomes just ritualistic and academic,” said Mothapo.
“The ANC stands ready for this debate, to condemn this motion into the rubbish bin of history through superior and cogent arguments.”
ANA