Africa-Press – South-Africa. National Assembly Deputy Speaker Lechesa Tsenoli said it was wrong to say that Parliament “shielded” President Cyril Ramaphosa from scrutiny over allegations related to the theft of foreign currency from his Phala Phala farm.
On Thursday, the National Assembly Programming Committee discussed DA chief whip Siviwe Gwarube’s proposal for the National Assembly to hold another vote on the establishment of an ad hoc committee into the Phala Phala allegations.
Meanwhile, the EFF wants Section 189 proceedings – also called impeachment proceedings – to be instituted after Ramaphosa’s failed in his bid to have the Constitutional Court overturn an independent panel’s report on the allegations.
In September last year, the ANC scuppered the DA’s proposal for the establishment of an ad hoc committee on Phala Phala, and voted down impeachment proceedings while the Constitutional Court’s decision was still pending.
But Gwarube said new facts had come to light since the House last voted on the establishment of the ad hoc committee – particularly, the South African Revenue Service’s (SARS) revelation that it did not find a record that the $580 000 paid to Ramaphosa had been declared when the money was brought into the country. He said the House should have another vote on the matter without a debate.
EFF MP Hlengiwe Mkhaliphi said: “We need to establish this ad hoc committee in terms of Section 89 because we have to start the process of removing the president. South Africans out there are waiting for Parliament to do its work, not to shield the president.”
ANC MP Hope Papo added: “That motion can be brought. It will be defeated again!”
Some MPs grumbled that he was out of order.
Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula said:
National Assembly Secretary Masibulele Xaso said they had responded to the EFF, stating the Section 89 process should continue in accordance with rules for such a process.
This would most likely entail the lodging of another Section 89 motion.
UDM Nqabayomzi Kwankwa said the party would support the establishment of an ad hoc committee into Phala Phala. He said Parliament had “elected to shield” Ramaphosa last year and that it was wrong.
But Tsenoli took exception to the claim and said:
Tsenoli added that when the president exercised his legal rights, it didn’t equate to Parliament protecting him.
He said Parliament followed a democratic process and that decisions were made through votes.
“If we didn’t follow the rules, then it would be wrong. But we did follow the rules.”
Mapisa-Nqakula said a date for the vote on the DA’s motion must be presented to next Thursday’s meeting of the National Assembly Programming Committee.
It will be a vote on the motion, and parties may deliver declarations of their vote.
For More News And Analysis About South-Africa Follow Africa-Press
