- A recent rule to be able to impeach a president has unanimously approved
- The EFF, although disappointed by some of the terms, wants to immediately use the opportunity to impeach President Cyril Ramaphosa
- The DA also welcomed the move, saying that it is not sustainable for the president to not have known about Jacob Zuma’s part in the State Capture
The EFF wants to test a recently approved rule to remove a president for impeachment on President Cyril Ramaphosa.
The rule, which was approved unanimously, gave effect to Section 89 of the Constitution.
Mbuyiseni Ndlozi, an MP for the EFF, welcomed the ruling but was disappointed that their suggestion for an independent body, overseen by a judge, to preside over any case a president had to answer for had been ignored. This is optional but the party had hoped for it to be an obligation.
"But what this rule really does, it says that the days where presidents, like the constitutional delinquent Jacob Zuma, who violated the Constitution, that when such people have done so in the way that Zuma did, it will no longer happen without consequences," Ndlozi said.
"It seems that the next person who must be put through this process is Ramaphosa. We must investigate as Parliament. We must put this rule into a test…"
The approval of the rule was appreciated by DA chief whip John Steenhuisen who thanked every member of the committee. He went on to criticise the ANC for not having held ex-president Jacob Zuma accountable
"Can we believe the myth and shibboleth that one man on his own was capable of entrenching, ensuring, defending and manipulating the whole state capture process in South Africa?" he asked.
"Now, honourable members, that is so fanciful, that anyone who believes that, probably still believes in the tooth fairy or Father Christmas. Because it is impossible to sustain the grand theft we've seen with state capture by a single individual.
"We know, you know, South Africa knows, that at every step of the way Mr Zuma was aided, abetted, protected and defended by the very party that sits to the right of me today [the ANC]," Steenhuisen said.
"The truth of the matter is that it is not sustainable for Mr Ramaphosa to say that he didn't know. Just as it is not sustainable for him to say he did not know of the half a million campaign donation (R500K) made into a trust account of his son.
"I'll say this to you: we have swapped ubaba ka Duduzane for ubaba ka Andile. So we have to ask ourselves, South Africans, what has changed?”
Enjoyed reading our story? Download BRIEFLY's news app on Google Play now and stay up-to-date with major South African news!