The Democratic Alliance (DA) on Wednesday morning said it will be meeting with its legal counsel before commenting further. The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) issued a brief statement shortly after midnight saying its leader would be holding a press briefing on Thursday.The United Democratic Movement (UDM) said the Constitutional Court application must go ahead.This was the early reaction to President Jacob Zuma’s statement saying he had asked the Constitutional Court to appoint the auditor-general and minister of finance to “independently and impartially” determine how much money he owes for the Nkandla upgrades.On Tuesday morning‚ a week before the Constitutional Court hears argument on an application on the matter‚ Zuma asked to court the appoint them to determine the “amount he is to pay”.On Tuesday night‚ the Presidency said “Zuma has proposed an end to the drawn-out legal controversy regarding the Public Protector’s March 2014 report on Nkandla‚ ‘Secure in Comfort’ ”.Although the statement said the proposal was contained in a letter sent by the “president’s attorneys to the Registrar of the Constitutional Court” that morning‚ the statement later suggested that the plan had already been presented to – and apparently ignored – by the applicants in the case.“None of the EFF (Economic Freedom Fighters)‚ the DA (Democratic Alliance) and the Public Protector have responded to the president’s proposal‚ which was made in his answering affidavit in November last year‚” the Presidency said.The DA on Wednesday said it had noted Zuma’s statement‚ but said it “will not enter into any settlement that would effectively undermine the remedial action expressly prescribed by the public protector”. “In any event‚ this amounts to an admission by the president that he did‚ in fact‚ unduly benefit for these upgrades and is now attempting to avert any further damage to his public image before the DA won its case…”. “In the pursuance of justice for the South African taxpayer‚ whose hard-earrned money was misappropriated for these upgrades‚ the DA will ensure that any settlement offer made will be just and equitable and in accordance with the public protector’s remedial action‚” the party said ahead of a press briefing planned for 10.30am.The EFF did not comment directly on the Presidency statement‚ but issued an invitation to to a press conference “to be addressed by the CIC Julius Malema” on Thursday. No further details were given.The UDM’s Bantu Holomisa took to Twitter - ‏@BantuHolomisa – to say: “#ConCourtOnZuma: The CC must proceed to confirm powers of the PP. We reject his ref to AG. PP's remedial actions can't be amended by JZ.”Zuma’s statement said it would “now be for the court to decide if the offer is an appropriate basis for an order when the applications are argued on 9 February 2016.”The EFF and the DA had applied directly to the Constitutional Court‚ claiming that steps taken by Zuma to give effect to the remedial action ordered by the public protector – who is an interested party in the applications - are unconstitutional.The statement also said the “Zuma remains critical of a number of factual aspects and legal conclusions in the report”.It also said the “irregularities that occurred in the course of upgrades…to the traditional family home the President has had at Nkandla for many years…continue to be investigated in separate inquiries relating to officials and professional consultants on the project”. The Presidency also stressed that the public protector’s report “specifically found no wrongdoing of any kind by the president”.“To achieve an end to the drawn-out dispute in a manner that meets the public protector’s recommendations and is beyond political reproach‚ the president proposes that the determination of the amount he is to pay should be independently and impartially determined‚” the statement said.“Given the objection by one of the parties to the involvement of SAPS (South African Police Service)‚ as the public protector herself had required‚ the auditor-general and minister of finance be requested by the court‚ through appropriate designees‚ to conduct the exercise directed by the Public Protector.”A video produced by the SAPS justifying the security upgrades was widely lambasted.“The president also supports the need for finality in the matter of the public protector’s report. However‚ he believes and contends in his affidavits filed in court that the DA and the EFF have misinterpreted and/or are manipulating the public protector’s report for the purposes of political expediency.”..