ANC MPs facing ‘overwhelming intimidation’ ahead of Phala Phala vote

President Cyril Ramaphosa

File Picture: President Cyril Ramaphosa. Picture: Itumeleng English African News Agency (ANA).

Published Dec 13, 2022

Share

Durban - Opposition parties have accused the ANC of using “overwhelming intimidation” against its own MPs who today will decide whether to proceed with an impeachment committee for President Cyril Ramaphosa.

The ATM, UDM and IFP said that ANC chairperson Gwede Mantashe’s comments to a national newspaper, in which he warned ANC MPs about the consequences of defying an ANC instruction, were harmful to democracy.

The ATM and UDM had written to Parliament Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula to insist on a secret ballot today so that ANC MPs can vote with their conscience and not with the threat of expulsion hovering over their heads.

Mapisa-Nqakula has yet to respond to the latest request for a secret ballot. Last week she said an open and transparent procedure could only bring about public trust and confidence in the Assembly and the democratic dispensation and ruled against the secret ballot.

ATM leader Vuyo Zungula, in a letter to Mapisa-Nqakula in which he made the secret ballot request for the second time, said that Mantashe issued “an unlawful and spine-chilling threat” of expulsion to members of the ANC whose conscience vote may differ with that of the party line.

A quotation attributed to Mantashe says: “Ask Makhosi Khoza what happens when you defy the ANC. She had to leave. If you defy the ANC you will have to leave because it means you don’t have respect for the organisation, you are an individual. Conscience is okay, but we have a political system.”

Zungula in the letter said it was clear the secret ballot was the only option, otherwise ANC MPs who voted with their conscience would be exposed to the wrath of the ANC.

Yesterday Zungula said the intimidation of MPs was a threat to democracy.

“What they are doing spits in the face of the Constitution as MPs must be faithful to the republic over their duty to party.

“Mantashe is saying that any ANC MP who exercises oversight, which is their duty, faces expulsion. This is a threat to the independence of MPs.”

Zungula said a secret ballot was essential as ANC MPs would find it hard to go against the party decision.

UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said Mantashe’s comments were meant to intimidate ANC MPs, describing it as “intimidation, occasioned by arrogance of power and abuse of the systems of government”.

“They control the Speaker, who will not grant the secret ballot. We are still waiting to hear from her,” said Holomisa.

“Those ANC MPs have a strong case because the national chairperson has said he will expel them if they vote for the impeachment process to continue. The Constitutional Court must protect them.”

IFP leader Velenkosini Hlabisa said he was surprised as he thought the ANC would not be fearful of the process if they were guided by their conscience.

“The outcomes are in the interest of South Africa and they should have done what is right. If ANC MPs are not satisfied with the party decision, allow them to express their views internally. If you put aside State Capture, Phala Phala is the worst scandal in the new dispensation,” Hlabisa said.

He said that the ANC can use majoritarian rule in Parliament to keep president Ramaphosa in power, but the people of the country can make up their own minds about the type of organisation leading the country.

“To intimidate MPs ahead of a vote in Parliament is a disgrace.”

The ANC national executive committee said last week that the party would vote against the adoption of the section 89 independent panel report as it was being taken on review.

Last week Ramaphosa filed papers at the Constitutional Court for a review of the panel report, saying he wanted direct access to the highest court in the land because of the serious nature of the report’s recommendations.

In court papers, Ramaphosa said he was requesting direct access to the apex court, as “this is an application for a decision of the kind contemplated by section 167 (4) (e) of the Constitution in that the court is asked to decide that the panel, an organ of the National Assembly, failed to fulfil its obligations in terms of section 89 of the Constitution read with the rules of the National Assembly”.