By Simon Nare
The uMkhonto weSizwe Party has demanded that National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza replace Makashule Gana as chairperson of Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment committee with an MP from outside the Government of National Unity (GNU), saying his RISE Mzansi affiliation creates “structural bias”.
The committee is investigating whether grounds exist for President Cyril Ramaphosa’s removal under Section 89 of the Constitution in connection with the theft of foreign currency from his private Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo.
MK parliamentary leader Dr John Hlophe wrote to Didiza following the committee’s 18-9 vote on Tuesday to rescind its earlier recommendation of Advocate Griffiths Madonsela SC as evidence leader and restart the process.
ALSO READ: Competition Commission may probe township malls over small-business exclusion
The party said Gana’s position as a member of RISE Mzansi, which is part of the GNU, raised questions about the independence of the committee.
MK said that the decision to reverse Madonsela’s recommendation, supported by the ANC, DA and other GNU parties, went against Parliament’s legal advice.
“That legal advice pronounced clearly that there was no new material disclosure arising from the ANC SG’s letter to Parliament. Nothing turns on it,” the party said.
In fact, Parliament’s Constitutional and Legal Services Office in its 26 August legal opinion said the subsequent confirmation that Madonsela’s earlier legal work had been for the ANC amounted to “new information that was not expressly before the impeachment committee when it reached its recommendation”.
The legal service office said MPs could either reaffirm their earlier decision and give reasons for doing so, or rescind the recommendation and reconsider the matter — the option the committee eventually chose.
MK also pointed out the ANC’s earlier position on Madonsela, saying: “The ANC itself had underscored that Adv Madonsela SC was competent and that his integrity was not questioned.”
The ANC had not objected when the committee recommended Madonsela on 5 August.
MK said the situation changed after Ramaphosa objected to Madonsela being appointed as evidence leader.
“However, abruptly after Mr. Ramaphosa objected to Advocate Madonsela’s appointment, the ANC and DA coalition, and other so-called GNU partners including Rise Mzansi – the party that Mr. Gana comes from – suddenly made an about-turn.
“They reopened a concluded process so that they could abuse their majority in the Impeachment Committee to overturn the 05 August democratic decision. The Committee’s own legal advice had pronounced that nothing turns based on Mr. Ramaphosa’s objection. An independent Chairperson would have accepted that advice and affirmed that Parliament must finalise the administrative processes to appoint the Evidence Leader.”
ALSO READ: Germany, France pledge R5.6bn to fix metro services
The MKP said Gana instead allowed the matter to be put to another vote because there were differing views among committee members.
“This is illogical and inconsistent with Parliament’s legal advice,” it said.
It also invoked the Constitutional Court’s May ruling that revived the Phala Phala impeachment process, arguing that the decision to hold another vote on the evidence leader amounted to the type of majoritarian obstruction the court had sought to prevent.
“Requesting a fresh vote on the Evidence Leader is inconsistent with the Constitutional Court finding that tried to correct Parliament against majoritarian blockage. The Court intervened precisely because a majority had previously blocked accountability.”
In his letter, Hlophe asked Didiza to declare Gana’s 1 June election as chairperson inconsistent with the requirements of impartiality under Section 89 read with Sections 1(d), 42(3) and 237 of the Constitution.
He also asked her to direct a new election in which nominees disclose their GNU alignment and recuse themselves where there is a conflict, or alternatively ensure that the chairperson is drawn from MPs whose parties are not signatories to the GNU Statement of Intent.
Hlophe said that Gana’s assurances that he would act impartially were insufficient to address what MK regarded as an institutional problem.
“The numbers elected Mr Gana, but the argument is that the Constitution requires more than a numerical majority,” Hlophe said in the letter.
