Johannesburg - The battle for the leadership of Cope between Mbhazima Shilowa and Mosiuoa Lekota is now in the hands of their respective lawyers. The judge will then make a final decision.
The lawyers for the two confirmed in the Johannesburg High Court on Monday that they were ready to argue on Wednesday, bringing the four-year-long battle nearer to an end.
Shilowa’s counsel will be the first to address the court, and he is expected to ask for the dismissal of Lekota’s application on the grounds that he purged every Cope member who was seen to be in support of Shilowa.
Advocate Jan Heunis SC has already indicated in court during Lekota’s final cross-examination on Monday that Lekota was fond of establishing parallel Cope structures in various provinces which did not support him.
In his cross-examination, Heunis painted a picture of Lekota as a person who is greedy for power.
The court heard that after Lekota interdicted the outcome of Cope’s May 30, 2010 meeting which passed a vote of no confidence in him, he then called a meeting on July 2, 2010, where he invited only his supporters.
At that meeting, according to records before court, Lekota and his supporters set a new date of September 30 to October 2, 2010 for a national elective congress.
Lekota confirmed the September 30 date, which was contradictory to his main evidence.
In his main evidence last week, Lekota told the court that Cope’s inaugural conference in December 2008 agreed that the party could host a national congress only if all nine provinces had fully fledged provincial structures with an audited membership.
He denied Shilowa’s version that they were instructed to hold a national congress in less than two years.
Lekota agreed that at the time of his announcement of the congress date, some of the provinces were not ready for such a national congress, but he said the majority of his members wanted a national congress - a contradiction vividly pointed out by Heunis.
Heunis maintained in his cross-examination that Lekota was doing everything in his power to have a national congress which would not include Shilowa.
The Star