Johannesburg - President Cyril Ramaphosa’s assertion that he is not constitutionally mandated to resolve the country’s Eskom crisis has attracted the ire of political parties and commentators who argue that the president has a constitutional duty to the people of this country, including resolving the paralysing energy crisis.
This comes after Ramaphosa released an opposing affidavit in the case being brought by the United Democratic Movement (UDM) and 17 other parties and trade unions, clarifying the government’s position on the provision of electricity under the Constitution.
The president said in the affidavit that the three spheres of government were not required by the Constitution to perform powers not vested in them.
The group wants the high court to declare the ANC-led government’s response to load shedding unconstitutional and a breach of fundamental human rights. The case is set to be heard on March 20 in the high court.
UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said the ruling party and its ministers, including Gwede Mantashe, Fikile Mbalula and Pravin Gordhan should be directly held responsible for the energy crisis.
“The ANC has plunged our country into darkness. They should apologise and return the money the ANC stole from Eskom,” Holomisa said.
In court papers, the parties allege that the construction of Medupi power station was improperly commissioned.
They further said that Hitachi, a Tokyo-based company, was awarded a tender to construct both Medupi and Kusile in 2007 without having the requisite expertise in the South African coal industry.
In his own answering affidavit in the same court case, outgoing former Eskom CEO André de Ruyter said “that the decisions of the ANC-led government, dating as far back as 1998, are directly to blame for the state of load shedding in which South Africa currently finds itself.
“With the building of new power stations delayed for over a decade, Eskom has had to run its ageing coal fleet at far higher usage levels than accepted international industry practice and defer planned maintenance.”
Energy analyst Tshepo Kgadima, speaking in an interview with a national broadcaster, said Ramaphosa is passing the buck and not taking responsibility.
“But from reading Ramaphosa’s affidavit, it appears to me that there is actually a complete disregard for the national legislation, particularly two pieces of legislation that would vest power in Cabinet. The one being the electricity regulations amendment act of 2007 as well as the Eskom Conversion Act 13 of 2001,” said Kgadima.
He said the Eskom Conversion Act 13 of 2001 placed the responsibility on the Public Enterprises minister.
ATM leader Vuyo Zungula said the country does not have a president that has its best interests at heart.
“If you’re going to a president that needs to be legally obligated to deal with a problem that is affecting millions of South Africans, leading to unemployment, depression, devastation, loss of lives and livelihoods, then clearly you do not have a president that has the best interests at heart...” said Zungula.
Cope said the party were not surprised by the president’s response. “We have said it before, Ramaphosa is far removed from the people who voted him into power. The response is insensitive and irresponsible...” said party spokesperson Dennis Bloem.
Acting Eskom spokesperson Daphne Mokwena could not be drawn to comment, saying the matter would be ventilated in court this month.
The Presidency issued a statement disputing the reports about President Cyril Ramaphosa’s affidavit submitted in court in relation to who is legally and constitutionally responsible to deal with the energy crisis.
“The statement does not in any way diminish the commitment of President Ramaphosa and this government to end load shedding as a matter of urgency,” the presidency said.
“Indeed, since taking office in 2018, President Ramaphosa has undertaken far-reaching measures to resolve an electricity crisis that stretches back more than a decade.”
The presidency said the “intense” focus that is being given to resolving the energy crisis and actions taken so far show that neither the president nor government has abdicated its responsibility for ending load shedding and setting the country on a path to energy security.
The Star