Cape Town - The DA has described President Jacob Zuma’s offer to resolve the Nkandla battle as yet another attempt to substitute his own process for that prescribed by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela.
Rejecting the offer on Wednesday morning, DA leader Mmusi Maimane said the DA would proceed with its Constitutional Court application on Tuesday to establish the principle that public protector remedial action was binding, regardless of Zuma’s offer to pay back some of the costs of non-security upgrades to his home.
Read: DA rejects Zuma’s #Nkandla proposal
While Zuma offered in a late-night statement to allow the finance minister and auditor-general to determine how much he should pay, Maimane said this amounted to “the latest attempt to establish a parallel process, for a fifth time”.
He was referring to the work of other organs, appointed by Zuma or Parliament, which investigated the Nkandla saga and exonerated the president, including the joint standing committee on intelligence, two ad hoc committees, a Department of Public Works task team, the Special Investigating Unit and Police Minister Nathi Nhleko.
In a ruling last October on a separate matter - relating to the appointment of Hlaudi Motsoeneng as chief operating officer of the SABC – the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed that an organ of state could not set up a parallel process to a public protector investigation and substitute its findings for hers.
Findings and remedial actions of the public protector could be overturned only by a court after being taken on review by the organ of state, the SCA ruled.
Chairman of the DA federal executive James Selfe said in any case the remedial action prescribed by Madonsela in the Nkandla matter was not limited to Zuma paying back a reasonable portion of the costs, but included that he should reprimand the ministers involved and report to Parliament, which he had also failed to do.
Maimane said if Zuma was allowed to choose his own process in this matter it would open the door for other parties to follow suit in future.
The DA wanted to establish the extent and effect of the public protector’s powers by continuing with its case.
Madonsela herself is expected to comment on Zuma’s offer, contained in a letter to the registrar of the Constitutional Court, copied to the litigants, later on Wednesday.
#PayBackTheMoney: political parties' 2 cents
The EFF, which brought the original application for direct access to the Constitutional Court on the grounds Zuma had failed his constitutional duty to comply with Madonsela’s remedial action and that Parliament had failed in its duty to hold him to account, is also consulting its legal team before responding.
ANC alliance partner Cosatu, meanwhile, welcomed Zuma’s move, saying it showed “the president is prepared to listen and take political responsibility as a leader of the nation”.
The federation said it would also “deny the opportunistic opposition parties oxygen to bolster their elections campaigns”.
The matter had become “a swamp” in which “political charlatans” had been swimming to get the public’s attention and to vilify the ANC and the president.
Political Bureau